Homosexuality: Morals and Ethics Catch-All Thread

NormanTheIntern wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:
Trying to pass laws or amend state constitutions to ban gay marriage now is just a petty, petulant thing to do.

Why? Does your objection extend to pro-gay marriage rules as well? What's wrong with leaving an issue not addressed by the federal government up to a popular vote?

I think OG's point was that this is a done deal. You look at the demographics, and the pro-gay marriage side looks like it's going to win out. Passing these laws does nothing to stop that: it's one thing to keep up the fight in hopes the tide will turn; it's another thing to leave behind booby traps just to make your opponent's life miserable.

NormanTheIntern wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:
Trying to pass laws or amend state constitutions to ban gay marriage now is just a petty, petulant thing to do.

Why? Does your objection extend to pro-gay marriage rules as well? What's wrong with leaving an issue not addressed by the federal government up to a popular vote?

Because that would have worked so well with civil rights?

Rubb Ed wrote:
Let me throw this out there to see how you folks think about this (partially because we're kind of circling the drain a bit and partially because I'm curious):

Overlooking the morality or lack thereof of homosexuality, what are the ethics of LGBT acceptance and/or discrimination? As I understand the concept, a Stoic philosopher might say both sides are right as long as peace of mind is found, whereas a Hedonist philosopher might say that it is ethically wrong to accept LGBT, as there are more people who are displeased by acceptance than are pleased.

(N.B. I'm taking a basics of philosophy class shortly, so if I'm wrong on this, I'm sure my professor will fill me in in a couple of weeks.)

The first thing that comes to mind is the 'depth' of their dis/pleasure. If ten people experience one unit of displeasure, is that balanced out by one person experiencing ten units of pleasure?

The Conformist wrote:
Perhaps I am mistaken on your meaning. But please allow me to clarify where I am coming from and emphasize that this is something you will probably never understand or get, but it is how I feel and I will not change who I am at my core because the world tells me to. But just like the homosexual community, this is something about me that I cannot change, it is ingrained in my soul, it is my way of life. There comes a point in everyone's life where you have to take a stand on what you truly believe is right, you can't let the world push you to think one way just because they say it's wrong.

I am late to the party as usual and do not know if The Conformist is still checking this thread or not.

This little piece caught my attention of catching up on the thread. I do not know The Conformist and do not know if you have children or not, or if you plan on ever having any. I am just curious if this is how you feel and you can not change it, how would you handle your son coming to you and informing you that he was gay?

Would you tell him you do not support him in life?

Farscry wrote:
NormanTheIntern wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:
Trying to pass laws or amend state constitutions to ban gay marriage now is just a petty, petulant thing to do.

Why? Does your objection extend to pro-gay marriage rules as well? What's wrong with leaving an issue not addressed by the federal government up to a popular vote?

It already was, by Prop 8.

And fortunately, we have a judicial system in place to monitor and ensure that our laws aren't a case of the Tyranny of the Majority (which our Constitution is written specifically to guard against).

Well then, SCOTUS will finally rule on whether homosexuals are a protected class and settle the issue. Until that happens, or a wider-reaching federal law is passed, I fail to see how it's "dirty pool" to pass laws on the issue - especially by popular vote, since the argument being made that it's a settled issue in the court of popular opinion?

Kraint wrote:
NormanTheIntern wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:
Trying to pass laws or amend state constitutions to ban gay marriage now is just a petty, petulant thing to do.

Why? Does your objection extend to pro-gay marriage rules as well? What's wrong with leaving an issue not addressed by the federal government up to a popular vote?

Only if we can vote to invalidate any marriage certificate signed by anyone other than judges. Gotta keep that government out of religious institutions, right? Ooh, maybe we can vote to invalidate my marriage too, since my wife and I are different races.

Throw me in as well, because I wrote my own marriage ceremony, and my atheist wife and I had absolutely zero reference to anything spiritual or religious in the ceremony. Clearly, if this is a religious sacrament, we should vote as to whether or not I'm really married.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:
Kraint wrote:
NormanTheIntern wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:
Trying to pass laws or amend state constitutions to ban gay marriage now is just a petty, petulant thing to do.

Why? Does your objection extend to pro-gay marriage rules as well? What's wrong with leaving an issue not addressed by the federal government up to a popular vote?

Only if we can vote to invalidate any marriage certificate signed by anyone other than judges. Gotta keep that government out of religious institutions, right? Ooh, maybe we can vote to invalidate my marriage too, since my wife and I are different races.

Throw me in as well, because I wrote my own marriage ceremony, and my atheist wife and I had absolutely zero reference to anything spiritual or religious in the ceremony. Clearly, if this is a religious sacrament, we should vote as to whether or not I'm really married.

+1. Exact same boat. God wasn't invited to my wedding.

NormanTheIntern wrote:
SCOTUS will finally rule on whether homosexuals are a protected class and settle the issue.

It's a technicality, but an important one: the ruling won't be on whether homosexuals are a protected class, but on whether sexual orientation is (meaning discrimination against someone based on that factor would be illegal). That means heterosexuals would be part of that protected class as well.

Bloo Driver wrote:
The difference, of course, is the semantic argument of "Well being black is a state, whereas homosexuality is an act," which is something of a logical fallacy that leads to an impasse. Some people do not see homosexuality as an identity, just an action or behavior.

They're fundamentally different things, it's not a semantic argument. There's no single, defining behavior that defines and expresses race - it's simply what you look like. I *will* say, the term "identity" here is a semantically meaningless term that implies moral approval. You wouldn't use that term in connection with something morally meaningless (like which flavor ice cream we like) or something universally rejected (violence or aggression), yet we probably can be predisposed to both those things by genetics/evironmental factors.

NormanTheIntern wrote:
Bloo Driver wrote:
The difference, of course, is the semantic argument of "Well being black is a state, whereas homosexuality is an act," which is something of a logical fallacy that leads to an impasse. Some people do not see homosexuality as an identity, just an action or behavior.

They're fundamentally different things, it's not a semantic argument. There's no single, defining behavior that defines and expresses race - it's simply what you look like. I *will* say, the term "identity" here is a semantically meaningless term that implies moral approval. You wouldn't use that term in connection with something morally meaningless (like which flavor ice cream we like) or something universally rejected (violence or aggression), yet we probably can be predisposed to both those things by genetics/evironmental factors.

Who I'm attracted to is not a behavior. It is part of what makes up who I am, thus the term identity.

NormanTheIntern wrote:
Bloo Driver wrote:
The difference, of course, is the semantic argument of "Well being black is a state, whereas homosexuality is an act," which is something of a logical fallacy that leads to an impasse. Some people do not see homosexuality as an identity, just an action or behavior.

They're fundamentally different things, it's not a semantic argument. There's no single, defining behavior that defines and expresses race - it's simply what you look like. I *will* say, the term "identity" here is a semantically meaningless term that implies moral approval. You wouldn't use that term in connection with something morally meaningless (like which flavor ice cream we like) or something universally rejected (violence or aggression), yet we probably can be predisposed to both those things by genetics/evironmental factors.

So I'll repeat the question you decided to cut off - is a man who isn't currently having sex with a man not homosexual anymore?

And the bolded part is just ... I dunno. I'm getting a little tired of discussing what people have decided I am and am not implying (rather than just reading what I type), so you'll please forgive me if I just dismiss it.

Cheeto1016 wrote:
The Conformist wrote:
Perhaps I am mistaken on your meaning. But please allow me to clarify where I am coming from and emphasize that this is something you will probably never understand or get, but it is how I feel and I will not change who I am at my core because the world tells me to. But just like the homosexual community, this is something about me that I cannot change, it is ingrained in my soul, it is my way of life. There comes a point in everyone's life where you have to take a stand on what you truly believe is right, you can't let the world push you to think one way just because they say it's wrong.

I am late to the party as usual and do not know if The Conformist is still checking this thread or not.

This little piece caught my attention of catching up on the thread. I do not know The Conformist and do not know if you have children or not, or if you plan on ever having any. I am just curious if this is how you feel and you can not change it, how would you handle your son coming to you and informing you that he was gay?

Would you tell him you do not support him in life?

I'm keeping an eye on the topic, but keeping my distance

I am a 30 year old male, soon to be engaged to a beautiful 25 year old woman. We don't necissarily PLAN on having children, but I suppose if it's ever gonna happen I better get started soon hah, I'm not getting any younger by any means (I seem to be getting more aches and pains and don't heal quite like I used too :-). Anyways, more on the question at hand, if I had a son or daughter that was a homosexual it would be something that would be conflicting. I'd have the love of my son, and on the other hand the love of my God (Beliefs). I would try to raise my child in the best way I possibly could, in a good Christian home where judgment would be reserved and promote tolerance and love for fellow man, which I would hope carry over, and also seal the fact that no matter what I would ALWAYS love them, and support them. I would not treat him or her any differently, but they would know that with my faith, I simply could not agree with the lifestyle. My religion says to love the sinner and dislike the sin.

But like I said, I would love him no matter how he or she turns out in life and no matter what decisions he or she makes.

Bloo Driver wrote:
So I'll repeat the question you decided to cut off - is a man who isn't currently having sex with a man not homosexual anymore?

They clearly are, but I'm not sure how that's applicable here, since the one person who actually expressed a negative opinion in this thread took pains to separate the person (and the underlying desire) from the act itself.

edit: he does it again right above this post - sinner vs sin.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:
Kraint wrote:
NormanTheIntern wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:
Trying to pass laws or amend state constitutions to ban gay marriage now is just a petty, petulant thing to do.

Why? Does your objection extend to pro-gay marriage rules as well? What's wrong with leaving an issue not addressed by the federal government up to a popular vote?

Only if we can vote to invalidate any marriage certificate signed by anyone other than judges. Gotta keep that government out of religious institutions, right? Ooh, maybe we can vote to invalidate my marriage too, since my wife and I are different races.

Throw me in as well, because I wrote my own marriage ceremony, and my atheist wife and I had absolutely zero reference to anything spiritual or religious in the ceremony. Clearly, if this is a religious sacrament, we should vote as to whether or not I'm really married.

Same here. Married by a judge a week before our wedding, where a good friend performed the ceremony my wife and I wrote.

The Conformist wrote:

But like I said, I would love him no matter how he or she turns out in life and no matter what decisions he or she makes.

Thank you for answering (I am not trying to pick on you, just asking probing questions )

You say you would love them, but they would know your beliefs. You can SAY you love them all you want, but not believing in your child does not show love. I would have to wonder if your child would go through its entire life believing his or her father does not love them.

Just something to think about.

The Conformist wrote:
Cheeto1016 wrote:
The Conformist wrote:
Perhaps I am mistaken on your meaning. But please allow me to clarify where I am coming from and emphasize that this is something you will probably never understand or get, but it is how I feel and I will not change who I am at my core because the world tells me to. But just like the homosexual community, this is something about me that I cannot change, it is ingrained in my soul, it is my way of life. There comes a point in everyone's life where you have to take a stand on what you truly believe is right, you can't let the world push you to think one way just because they say it's wrong.

I am late to the party as usual and do not know if The Conformist is still checking this thread or not.

This little piece caught my attention of catching up on the thread. I do not know The Conformist and do not know if you have children or not, or if you plan on ever having any. I am just curious if this is how you feel and you can not change it, how would you handle your son coming to you and informing you that he was gay?

Would you tell him you do not support him in life?

I'm keeping an eye on the topic, but keeping my distance

I am a 30 year old male, soon to be engaged to a beautiful 25 year old woman. We don't necissarily PLAN on having children, but I suppose if it's ever gonna happen I better get started soon hah, I'm not getting any younger by any means (I seem to be getting more aches and pains and don't heal quite like I used too :-). Anyways, more on the question at hand, if I had a son or daughter that was a homosexual it would be something that would be conflicting. I'd have the love of my son, and on the other hand the love of my God (Beliefs). I would try to raise my child in the best way I possibly could, in a good Christian home where judgment would be reserved and promote tolerance and love for fellow man, which I would hope carry over, and also seal the fact that no matter what I would ALWAYS love them, and support them. I would not treat him or her any differently, but they would know that with my faith, I simply could not agree with the lifestyle. My religion says to love the sinner and dislike the sin.

But like I said, I would love him no matter how he or she turns out in life and no matter what decisions he or she makes.

The contradiction in the bolded section is what led me to attempt suicide at the onset of puberty (I was 9). It kept me a loner through my teens fearing that someone would figure out I was gay right up until I came out at 21. After coming out, it drove a wedge between me and my family so badly that I broke off most communication with them for the nearly two years it took for them to find a way to accept me. So for the sake of your future children, I hope none of them are gay and have to deal with the decade of "loving" nonacceptance until they're no longer under your roof and have the freedom to choose whether maintaining a relationship with their parents is more harmful than healthy.

Cheeto1016 wrote:
The Conformist wrote:

But like I said, I would love him no matter how he or she turns out in life and no matter what decisions he or she makes.

Thank you for answering (I am not trying to pick on you, just asking probing questions )

You say you would love them, but they would know your beliefs. You can SAY you love them all you want, but not believing in your child does not show love. I would have to wonder if your child would go through its entire life believing his or her father does not love them.

Just something to think about.

Agreed. You say you disapprove of his lifestyle. It's not a lifestyle, it's who he is. It's not an easy life knowing your father doesn't approve of you.

NormanTheIntern wrote:
They clearly are, but I'm not sure how that's applicable here, since the one person who actually expressed a negative opinion in this thread took pains to separate the person (and the underlying desire) from the act itself.

Because it was a comment in regards to this -

NormanTheIntern wrote:
Jayhawker wrote:
We would never allow new members on these forums to repeatedly point out that blacks are immoral. But right now, it is acceptable for people to repeatedly say that a segment of our community is immoral. I don't think it should, but I understand why it is right now.

I find comments like these curious because there hasn't been a single person in this thread who's said anything that would substantively impact homosexuals' rights to do... anything. It's not like people are coming in here and spewing a bunch of hate and invective (at gays, anyway).

Where the "sin vs sinner" argument fails is this - homosexuals are homosexuals by nature. You can't say "I find nothing wrong with being born black, but having that dark, kinky hair is sinful. Why don't they all shave their heads?" It'd ridiculous. So the whole "well you might be born homosexual, but don't do homosexual things" is... I dunno. Hilarious? Silly? To me, the whole sinner vs sin thing in this particular scenario is usually employed as nothing more than a way to re-align someone's cognitive dissonance when they realize that despite being generally good, accepting people, they're very obviously marking a whole segment of the population as "wrong" by no other fault than being born.

The Conformist wrote:
My religion says to love the sinner and dislike the sin.

First, thanks for giving us a little background, since I was curious about that.

However, I am going to call you on this one. My husband's done it to others in various threads, which you may or may not have seen, but I'm going to ask you as a matter of course about this. Would you honestly be able to love the sinner and hate the sin if it were someone who murdered your wife-to-be? Or if (God forbid) it were someone who molested you as a child?

From a moral standpoint, the statement is rather meaningless because the actions these people have taken are directly injurious to others and deprive them of inalienable rights. However, until I reveal myself as an openly gay man, you wouldn't have had any means to have had inalienable rights infringed upon, and even at that point your inalienable rights aren't touched. I don't deprive your or anyone you love of their lives, nor their liberty, nor their pursuit of happiness. There's no barrier there on any of those things. Even the actions I take upon my sexual orientation do not deprive you of any of these things, barring my enacting them upon you against your will (in which case I'm a batterer or a rapist, which is another deal entirely).

However, while your beliefs themselves don't deprive me of any of those things, actions taken based on those things most definitely do. As it stands, the great majority of the states in the US, as well as many countries around the world including the US, are not safe havens for me and my husband and our rights. We can be legally discriminated against (and are), we can be killed simply for being who we are even if we were to never act upon our feelings, and LGBT kids and teens are regularly thrown out of their homes, forced into reparative therapy (which has been shown not to work and to be actively harmful to the patients in question), beaten and killed (or driven to suicide).

The Conformist wrote:
Cheeto1016 wrote:
The Conformist wrote:
Perhaps I am mistaken on your meaning. But please allow me to clarify where I am coming from and emphasize that this is something you will probably never understand or get, but it is how I feel and I will not change who I am at my core because the world tells me to. But just like the homosexual community, this is something about me that I cannot change, it is ingrained in my soul, it is my way of life. There comes a point in everyone's life where you have to take a stand on what you truly believe is right, you can't let the world push you to think one way just because they say it's wrong.

I am late to the party as usual and do not know if The Conformist is still checking this thread or not.

This little piece caught my attention of catching up on the thread. I do not know The Conformist and do not know if you have children or not, or if you plan on ever having any. I am just curious if this is how you feel and you can not change it, how would you handle your son coming to you and informing you that he was gay?

Would you tell him you do not support him in life?

I'm keeping an eye on the topic, but keeping my distance

I am a 30 year old male, soon to be engaged to a beautiful 25 year old woman. We don't necissarily PLAN on having children, but I suppose if it's ever gonna happen I better get started soon hah, I'm not getting any younger by any means (I seem to be getting more aches and pains and don't heal quite like I used too :-). Anyways, more on the question at hand, if I had a son or daughter that was a homosexual it would be something that would be conflicting. I'd have the love of my son, and on the other hand the love of my God (Beliefs). I would try to raise my child in the best way I possibly could, in a good Christian home where judgment would be reserved and promote tolerance and love for fellow man, which I would hope carry over, and also seal the fact that no matter what I would ALWAYS love them, and support them. I would not treat him or her any differently, but they would know that with my faith, I simply could not agree with the lifestyle. My religion says to love the sinner and dislike the sin.

But like I said, I would love him no matter how he or she turns out in life and no matter what decisions he or she makes.

Perhaps I'm reading this completely incorrectly, and I certainly don't mean to pile-on, but you seem to make one thing very clear: your love for your child and your love of your Beliefs would be in very real conflict and you would have a hard time reconciling them. As a parent, let me tell you — your (hypothetical, gay) child would know that. But it seems telling to me that there is no instance in which you consider the possibility that having a gay son you might come to understand your Beliefs differently. And, forgive me for this extrapolation, but it sure seems that you love loving your beliefs and hold them tightly so that you'll feel safe and secure. But from what you've said in this forum and especially in this post, it comes across that your Beliefs held so close and are so important to you that you don't seem to feel the need to reconsider them.

The Conformist wrote:
I'm extremely sorry you had to experience that in your life. Can I ask you if you're family actually TREATED you differently? For instance, not allowing your boyfriend over? Things like that? Other that simply my son knowing that it's not something I agree with, I would never keep him or his boyfriend/husband from spending time with the family, or make him feel out of place in any way. I think that there are many things in a persons life that should not be compromised, and I believe faith is one of them. Now you may or may not have new revelations on how scripture is interpreted (A whole other can of worms), we after all are only human and grow and learn everyday.

Think you may have quoted the wrong guy here.

The Conformist wrote:
I'm extremely sorry you had to experience that in your life. Can I ask you if you're family actually TREATED you differently? For instance, not allowing your boyfriend over? Things like that? Other that simply my son knowing that it's not something I agree with, I would never keep him or his boyfriend/husband from spending time with the family, or make him feel out of place in any way.

There was never an opportunity for them to treat me differently. They never knew I was gay until I came out at 21. All it took was hearing the "homosexuality is a sin" and "love the sinner, hate the sin" comments if there was a new story on homosexuality or AIDS. I couldn't even tell you now how it was I knew that being gay was wrong in their eyes at 9. There wasn't a single incident I could point to. What I can tell you is that at 9 I was convinced my parents hated me because I was something awful and couldn't change.

My parents are wonderful loving people. They weren't abusive in any way during my upbringing. This one disconnect undid everything they ever did or said to make me feel loved as a kid.

RoughneckGeek wrote:

The contradiction in the bolded section is what led me to attempt suicide at the onset of puberty (I was 9). It kept me a loner through my teens fearing that someone would figure out I was gay right up until I came out at 21. After coming out, it drove a wedge between me and my family so badly that I broke off most communication with them for the nearly two years it took for them to find a way to accept me. So for the sake of your future children, I hope none of them are gay and have to deal with the decade of "loving" nonacceptance until they're no longer under your roof and have the freedom to choose whether maintaining a relationship with their parents is more harmful than healthy.

I'm extremely sorry you had to experience that in your life. Can I ask you if you're family actually TREATED you differently? For instance, not allowing your boyfriend over? Things like that? Other that simply my son knowing that it's not something I agree with, I would never keep him or his boyfriend/husband from spending time with the family, or make him feel out of place in any way. I think that there are many things in a persons life that should not be compromised, and I believe faith is one of them. Now you may or may not have new revelations on how scripture is interpreted (A whole other can of worms), we after all are only human and grow and learn everyday.

*Corrected* Sucks being rushed hah.

The Conformist wrote:
RoughneckGeek wrote:

The contradiction in the bolded section is what led me to attempt suicide at the onset of puberty (I was 9). It kept me a loner through my teens fearing that someone would figure out I was gay right up until I came out at 21. After coming out, it drove a wedge between me and my family so badly that I broke off most communication with them for the nearly two years it took for them to find a way to accept me. So for the sake of your future children, I hope none of them are gay and have to deal with the decade of "loving" nonacceptance until they're no longer under your roof and have the freedom to choose whether maintaining a relationship with their parents is more harmful than healthy.
lostlobster wrote:
Perhaps I'm reading this completely incorrectly, and I certainly don't mean to pile-on, but you seem to make one thing very clear: your love for your child and your love of your Beliefs would be in very real conflict and you would have a hard time reconciling them. As a parent, let me tell you — your (hypothetical, gay) child would know that. But it seems telling to me that there is no instance in which you consider the possibility that having a gay son you might come to understand your Beliefs differently. And, forgive me for this extrapolation, but it sure seems that you love loving your beliefs and hold them tightly so that you'll feel safe and secure. But from what you've said in this forum and especially in this post, it comes across that your Beliefs held so close and are so important to you that you don't seem to feel the need to reconsider them.

I'm extremely sorry you had to experience that in your life. Can I ask you if you're family actually TREATED you differently? For instance, not allowing your boyfriend over? Things like that? Other that simply my son knowing that it's not something I agree with, I would never keep him or his boyfriend/husband from spending time with the family, or make him feel out of place in any way. I think that there are many things in a persons life that should not be compromised, and I believe faith is one of them. Now you may or may not have new revelations on how scripture is interpreted (A whole other can of worms), we after all are only human and grow and learn everyday.

That's not a trivial thing you can gloss over. Telling your son you don't agree with who he is and how he is born will create awful, awful feelings.

Edit: RNG basically already said with with more detail.

NormanTheIntern wrote:
OG_slinger wrote:
Trying to pass laws or amend state constitutions to ban gay marriage now is just a petty, petulant thing to do.

Why? Does your objection extend to pro-gay marriage rules as well? What's wrong with leaving an issue not addressed by the federal government up to a popular vote?

Why? Because the anti-gay marriage side has lost. It's lost because of the changing demographics of the country. And it's lost because the courts will continue to find gay marriage bans and other similar laws unconstitutional.

Rather than gracefully accepting inevitable defeat, the anti-gay marriage crowd is frantically trying to legislate its obsolete version of morality and otherwise throw sh*t in the path of progress in a vain attempt to slow it down. Their best case scenario is that they maybe buy 50 years of denying gays the right to marriage before even state constitutional amendments will be overturned by voters.

Seriously, go back and look at the Pew chart again. Those acceptance numbers aren't going to suddenly start to go down. They will continue to go up.

So knowing that in just a few short years the majority of Americans will support gay marriage and a few decades after that virtually everyone will be OK with gay marriage, why should we be rushing to ban or restrict gay marriage right now?

To answer your other questions, no, my objection doesn't extend to pro-gay marriage rules because I don't consider them pro-gay marriage rules. I simply view them as pro-marriage rules. If two consenting adults want to get married, let them.

As for what's wrong with leaving issues up to popular votes, well a simple read of the history of Jim Crow and the Civil Rights Movement shows the societal dangers and damages caused by a majority forcefully imposing their will on a minority.

And before you say that's what will happen to Christians if gay marriage is allow, think again. The majority religion in this country, for good or bad, is Christianity. Allowing gay marriage will not change that. The only thing that is changing is that a great number of those Christians are finally wising up and realizing that gay marriage isn't going to end the world.

Again, look at that Pew chart. A lot of those Millennials who are OK with gay marriage are Christian. Heck, there's even been some musing that the obsession Christianity currently has with all things gay is actually turning Millennials away from religion. As an atheist I find that fact delicious.

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.

RNG's anecdote says not necessarily.

SixteenBlue wrote:
The Conformist wrote:
RoughneckGeek wrote:

The contradiction in the bolded section is what led me to attempt suicide at the onset of puberty (I was 9). It kept me a loner through my teens fearing that someone would figure out I was gay right up until I came out at 21. After coming out, it drove a wedge between me and my family so badly that I broke off most communication with them for the nearly two years it took for them to find a way to accept me. So for the sake of your future children, I hope none of them are gay and have to deal with the decade of "loving" nonacceptance until they're no longer under your roof and have the freedom to choose whether maintaining a relationship with their parents is more harmful than healthy.
lostlobster wrote:
Perhaps I'm reading this completely incorrectly, and I certainly don't mean to pile-on, but you seem to make one thing very clear: your love for your child and your love of your Beliefs would be in very real conflict and you would have a hard time reconciling them. As a parent, let me tell you — your (hypothetical, gay) child would know that. But it seems telling to me that there is no instance in which you consider the possibility that having a gay son you might come to understand your Beliefs differently. And, forgive me for this extrapolation, but it sure seems that you love loving your beliefs and hold them tightly so that you'll feel safe and secure. But from what you've said in this forum and especially in this post, it comes across that your Beliefs held so close and are so important to you that you don't seem to feel the need to reconsider them.

I'm extremely sorry you had to experience that in your life. Can I ask you if you're family actually TREATED you differently? For instance, not allowing your boyfriend over? Things like that? Other that simply my son knowing that it's not something I agree with, I would never keep him or his boyfriend/husband from spending time with the family, or make him feel out of place in any way. I think that there are many things in a persons life that should not be compromised, and I believe faith is one of them. Now you may or may not have new revelations on how scripture is interpreted (A whole other can of worms), we after all are only human and grow and learn everyday.

That's not a trivial thing you can gloss over. Telling your son you don't agree with who he is and how he is born will create awful, awful feelings.

Edit: RNG basically already said with with more detail.

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 them 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, they would most likely be crushed. But life would go on for the both of us and I would still always love them.

They would know growing up that as a Christian, we are to love God more than anything or anyone on this earth. Even if it breaks our hearts to make that decision.

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.

SixteenBlue 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.

RNG's anecdote says not necessarily.

Not to sound heartless, or in any way make light of his situation, but we all go through bad things in our life, some completely horrible. My father was abusive, and an addict, I spent countless nights listening to my mother fighting and crying. It really took a toll on me, but my life went on and I learned and grew from it I forgave my father, and he eventually died because of addiction, but I do not dwell, and I do not let it effect my life.