Sexuality & Orientation: A question.

[marketandchurch]

This is a question I am very curious about, vis-a-vis the Christian/Muslim/Jew crowd. But atheists are welcome to chime in as well. Do you think sexuality is fixed?

If you think sexuality is fixed, what is your own personal explanation for the existence of other sexualities? Are there several possibilities vis-a-vis orientation, for the human creature? And by fixed nature, what do you believe is the strength of that rigidity?

Do you think it is somewhat of a spectrum wherein there are most of us, who have a fixed heterosexual orientation, a small group who have a fixed homosexual orientation, and an even tinier portion who are "confused," have multiple sexual identities, or no sexual identity at all?

In other words, please explain your view of the matter in full, and I would love to just get a cross-section of where Christians/Muslim/Jew are on the matter. It is incredibly helpful, because the premise we hold will frame the way we approach the issue of same-sex marriage.

Feel free to expand this to the greater Gay-Marriage debate if you wish, so long as it relates to gender, sexual orientation, and its affects on the society at large.

[JohnPaul]

kayky wrote:

No one should be forced to do anything. This issue often ends up with discarded children. However, many families are now embracing their gay children and accepting them just the way they are. There's nothing like a beloved child "coming out" to change a person's mind about homosexuality.

What if the child "comes out" as a terrorist bomber? Are there degrees of acceptance?

How does this relate to sexual orientation?

OK. What if the child "comes out" as a kidnapper of young girls? Certainly that is a sexual orientation?

[kayky]

kayky wrote:

No one should be forced to do anything. This issue often ends up with discarded children. However, many families are now embracing their gay children and accepting them just the way they are. There's nothing like a beloved child "coming out" to change a person's mind about homosexuality.

What if the child "comes out" as a terrorist bomber? Are there degrees of acceptance?

How does this relate to sexual orientation?

OK. What if the child "comes out" as a kidnapper of young girls? Certainly that is a sexual orientation?

Yes, it is. The difference is that gay people are not pedophiles. They have sex with other consenting adults.

[charles_hamm]

You are right. I don't surround myself with gay people.

This explains your lack of understanding and empathy. It's much easier to judge people you don't know.

That works both ways. Do you surround yourself with people who are opposed to gay marriage?

Please explain 'getting better'.

As society has become more accepting, it is gradually becoming easier for gay people to "come out." There are more role models on television, and over half of all
Americans support gay marriage. Anti-bullying lessons in schools now include gay children. These are all positive steps forward.

I don't know about T.V.
http://www.deadline.com/2013/05/nbcs-th ... cancelled/

The public may not be as receptive to this as you think. Also anti-bullying is fine so long as the school teachs what true bullying is. If the school is teaching that you must accept gay students as humans and not start fights then yes that is very appropriate. If they are teaching that a student can't voice disagreement with the gay lifestyle when asked for his/her opinion, then they are dead wrong and should be stopped from doing this.

Why should a family be forced to accept that their child is homosexual? I don't agree with abuse, but I also don't believe the parents should be forced to condone the lifestyle. If a parent tells the child that they are sinning then that should not be a problem as long as that is the way the parent really feels.

No one should be forced to do anything. This issue often ends up with discarded children. However, many families are now embracing their gay children and accepting them just the way they are. There's nothing like a beloved child "coming out" to change a person's mind about homosexuality.

Discarded children? Why is not discarded parents? Why is it that the parents are the ones seen as throwing away the relationship? That is biased.

What you are suggesting here is that the family is somehow in the wrong for not coddling to their child who says he/she is gay. The fact that the child is gay does not change the parents right to view homosexuality as a sin and to say that the lifestyle is wrong.

Personally, I see it as child abuse. But then I see raising a child in fundamentalism as child abuse.

As I see raising a child in an atheist or non-theist home as child abuse.

To be clear, however, I do not approve of physical or psychological abuse. Psychological abuse does not consist of telling the child your beliefs on the issue if the subject comes up though.

I guess it depends on whether or not you want to have a relationship with that child in the future.

The same can be said for the child. If the child wants a relationship he or she might actually want to see if the parents are right.

[charles_hamm]

That is not the situation I am talking about. I am talking a person willingly changing, not being forced to try to change.

Could you "willingly change" your sexual orientation? Could you choose to be gay? If one person can do it, then anyone should be able to.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/us/ex ... d=all&_r=0

Here is your one person (and a few more for good measure).

I don't recall asking for examples, but I did ask you a specific question in this post that you thus far have failed to answer.

You asked for one person and I provided that and more.

[noshameinChrist]

[Replying to post 1 by marketandchurch]

I personally don't understand the question. As a Christian, I ultimately believe the exercise of sinful conduct is a choice. The broader question seems to me to be whether feelings (or "orientation") justifies conduct. Just as I believe Adulterous acts is a sin, so too is homosexual acts. I personally don't think the issue is very daunting at all. Even if "orientation" is fixed or not, acting on the feeling is nevertheless sinful and wrong.

Note: this is not stated with hatred towards any person. It is said in deference to scripture. I'm not a homophobe. I believe heterosexual adultery, for example, is just as dispicable as homosexual acts.

I choose God.

It is cruel to expect people to live without a fulfilling, loving relationship, especially when the basis of such an expectation is a book written thousands of years ago by a primitive tribe with little understanding of human sexuality.


God chooses people.

Is it truly "cruel" to provide standards of conduct for what you've created? If not, then why would it be cruel for God to do so?

Again, I personally cannot judge a person's feelings (be they a married heterosexual with the urge to cheat on their spouse; or a person with an urge ["orientation"] for sexual contact with their same gender), but I do believe the God who created me has every right to expect that I comply with his direction.

This whole push to oppose scripture in this matter is at the same time steeped in hypocrisy and a failure to exercise simple reasoning skills.

"God chooses people"? Yes, I agree. He chooses those with a mind to obey Him. Those who will not, He rejects. I choose to strive to obey.

Lastly, I have a fulfilling and loving relationship with my kids, parents, and my longtime homie. I don't need or want to have sexual contact with any of them. Your statement is an example of the simple lapse in reasoning that I was eluding to.

-NSIC

[kayky]

That works both ways. Do you surround yourself with people who are opposed to gay marriage?

As a public high school teacher, I have no choice. The children of the good, the bad, and the ugly all come through my classroom door. I've seen gay children struggle, and I've seen them bullied.

I don't know about T.V.
http://www.deadline.com/2013/05/nbcs-th ... cancelled/

I was thinking more of The Ellen Degeneres Show, Modern Family, and Glee.

The public may not be as receptive to this as you think. Also anti-bullying is fine so long as the school teachs what true bullying is. If the school is teaching that you must accept gay students as humans and not start fights then yes that is very appropriate. If they are teaching that a student can't voice disagreement with the gay lifestyle when asked for his/her opinion, then they are dead wrong and should be stopped from doing this.

Harassment is bullying.

Why should a family be forced to accept that their child is homosexual? I don't agree with abuse, but I also don't believe the parents should be forced to condone the lifestyle. If a parent tells the child that they are sinning then that should not be a problem as long as that is the way the parent really feels.

Discarded children? Why is not discarded parents? Why is it that the parents are the ones seen as throwing away the relationship? That is biased.

No one is going to maintain a relationship with someone who cannot accept who they are. That's just reality. And it's usually the parents who want it that way.

As I see raising a child in an atheist or non-theist home as child abuse.

I wouldn't know. But I can't help but notice that such children tend to more open-minded.

The same can be said for the child. If the child wants a relationship he or she might actually want to see if the parents are right.

Moot point. Since they aren't.

[kayky]

Is it truly "cruel" to provide standards of conduct for what you've created? If not, then why would it be cruel for God to do so?

First of all, I don't think God ever did so. But, yes, it would be amazingly cruel to create gay people and then tell them it is wrong to be gay.

Again, I personally cannot judge a person's feelings (be they a married heterosexual with the urge to cheat on their spouse; or a person with an urge ["orientation"] for sexual contact with their same gender), but I do believe the God who created me has every right to expect that I comply with his direction.

This is a false analogy since the adulterer is breaking a vow. Can you explain why a loving, monogamous gay relationship is a sin? What exactly is sinful about it?

This whole push to oppose scripture in this matter is at the same time steeped in hypocrisy and a failure to exercise simple reasoning skills.

How is it hypocrisy if I think that using the Bible as a rule book is bunk? What "simple reasoning skills" have I failed to employ?

"God chooses people"? Yes, I agree. He chooses those with a mind to obey Him. Those who will not, He rejects. I choose to strive to obey.

God has never rejected anyone.

Lastly, I have a fulfilling and loving relationship with my kids, parents, and my longtime homie. I don't need or want to have sexual contact with any of them. Your statement is an example of the simple lapse in reasoning that I was eluding to.

What in the world are you talking about? What does incest have to do with it???

[noshameinChrist]

[Replying to post 67 by kayky]

First of all, I don't think God ever did so. But, yes, it would be amazingly cruel to create gay people and then tell them it is wrong to be gay.

If God "created gay people" then he also necessarily created those inclined to break vows (i.e. adulterers). Why is it wrong to be an adulterer?

How is it hypocrisy if I think that using the Bible as a rule book is bunk? What "simple reasoning skills" have I failed to employ?

This is not the basis of hypocrisy I see. The hypocrisy doesn't lie in your opinion, but in your actions. The simple reasoning skill you fail to employ is the fact that the creator of a thing should have a say in what the created does. If you do not believe in the God of the Bible, then obviously I can't reason with you on this point.

God has never rejected anyone.

Yes He has. As a result of disobedience (i.e. King Saul -- look it up). And, He will again.

What in the world are you talking about? What does incest have to do with it???

I am talking about the notion that "fulfilling love" necessarily includes sexual relationships. It does not. You're the one who made the statement, I just responded with a counter example.[/quote]

[kayky]

[Replying to post 64 by charles_hamm]

You asked for one person and I provided that and more.

I'm starting to wonder about your reading skills. I was not asking for an example. Here is my actual question, which you continue to ignore:

Could you choose to be gay? After all, if one person can choose to change his sexual orientation, shouldn't everyone be able to do it?

[kayky]

If God "created gay people" then he also necessarily created those inclined to break vows (i.e. adulterers). Why is it wrong to be an adulterer?

That's an excellent question. Why does God create people inclined to do what he says are sins and then punish them for being exactly as he created them to be?

Personally, I think adultery is wrong because it is the breaking of a vow that is made to another person. But evidently my moral standards are higher than this God you speak of.

This is not the basis of hypocrisy I see. The hypocrisy doesn't lie in your opinion, but in your actions. The simple reasoning skill you fail to employ is the fact that the creator of a thing should have a say in what the created does. If you do not believe in the God of the Bible, then obviously I can't reason with you on this point.

I do believe in God but not as he is described in the Bible. The problem I see with your reasoning is the assumption that the Bible reveals God's will. If God were to give us such a book, it would not be anything like the Bible, a book filled with errors, contradictions, and immoral demands.

Yes He has. As a result of disobedience (i.e. King Saul -- look it up). And, He will again.

That's a made up story. God is love. Love does not reject.

I am talking about the notion that "fulfilling love" necessarily includes sexual relationships. It does not. You're the one who made the statement, I just responded with a counter example.

I see. I did misunderstand. You are making a personal choice, and that is fine for you. Most healthy adults want and are entitled to a fulfilling, loving relationship that includes sexual fulfillment as well.