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.

[charles_hamm]

[Replying to post 250 by charles_hamm] That's just your opinion that he wasn't referring to homosexual bed-chamber attendants and also to his own sexual orientation.

No it's a fact. Jesus did not say in the verse you used that these men were homosexuals. It's not an opinion at all. You are trying to do what Christians are accused of all the time; read Jesus' mind. Also please show where Jesus said He was a homosexual.

Have you ever consulted Jesus or the gospel writers about this or is it just wishful thinking? Where does the bible say he was a heterosexual or even indicate he was a heterosexual? Afterall he was susposedly an unmarried man of thirty when marriage was the norm, and that he had a special relationship with one particular disciple and what really happened with the naked boy in Mark's secret gospel?

If you read Mark 19 you would see that Jesus clearly states marriage is between a man and a woman and says it would be better not to marry than to cause a woman to commit adultery. Being an unmarried man does not indicate He was homosexual. The "beloved disciple" has nothing to do with sexuality. It is about the spiritual relationship they had. Mark's secret gospel has been called a forgery on multiple occasions so why even discuss something who's authenticity can't be verified.

Hmmm, I can't seem to find Mark 19 in my version. And I fail to see what Jesus' view about adultery has got to do with his sexual orientation anyway. Oh so Jesus had a special spiritual relationship with just one particular disciple along with a physical one. And is the naked boy in Mark's secret gospel the same one who was stalking Jesus (Mark 14:51)?

You won't either. In my haste I typed Mark instead or Matthew. I apologize for that mistake. The bible does not say Jesus had a special 'physical relationship' with the disciple. There is no verse that says this. Until Mark's secret gospel is proven to be legitiment, I see no need to even debate it. Right now there are serious doubts about its authenticity.

[mitty]

[Replying to post 252 by charles_hamm]

And what type of hormone therapy is that? Does it make those genetically male persons with Swyer syndrome start menstruating and ovulating?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_gonadal_dysgenesis

Estrogen and progesterone therapy. Menstruating yes, ovulating I am unsure about.

So what's the difference between the hormone treatment of those with Swyer syndrome (ie genetically male) and a trans-sexual who's genitals are surgically changed to match their gender identity. And I can assure you that the unformed testes of someone with Swyer syndrome will not start ovulating, and if they did what would be the fate of the 25% of all embryos with a YY sex-chromosome configuration. And it doesn't matter if someone with Swyer syndrome is referred to as a girl, they are still genetically male.

A trans-sexual self identifies his/her gender so that is strictly a matter of choice. There is nothing in his/her anatomy to necessitate the surgery. A person with Swyer syndrome has a condition that can be treated with the therapies I listed. That condition necessitates the treatment.

If a person tells you they have Swyer syndrome and tells you they are female, are you going to dispute them? If so then doesn't that wipe out the whole notion of self identifying gender?

No treatment of Swyer syndrome can alter the fact that they are genetically male. Can you change your gender identity at will, and do you dream that you are a male person in some of your dreams and a female person in other dreams, or do you think your gender identity is set at birth?

If a person tells you they are a genetically-male trans-sexual who has had a sex-change operation to match their gender identity and tells you that they are female, are you going to dispute that and tell that person to use the male lavatories instead of the female lavatories?

[mitty]

[Replying to post 250 by charles_hamm] That's just your opinion that he wasn't referring to homosexual bed-chamber attendants and also to his own sexual orientation.

No it's a fact. Jesus did not say in the verse you used that these men were homosexuals. It's not an opinion at all. You are trying to do what Christians are accused of all the time; read Jesus' mind. Also please show where Jesus said He was a homosexual.

Have you ever consulted Jesus or the gospel writers about this or is it just wishful thinking? Where does the bible say he was a heterosexual or even indicate he was a heterosexual? Afterall he was susposedly an unmarried man of thirty when marriage was the norm, and that he had a special relationship with one particular disciple and what really happened with the naked boy in Mark's secret gospel?

If you read Mark 19 you would see that Jesus clearly states marriage is between a man and a woman and says it would be better not to marry than to cause a woman to commit adultery. Being an unmarried man does not indicate He was homosexual. The "beloved disciple" has nothing to do with sexuality. It is about the spiritual relationship they had. Mark's secret gospel has been called a forgery on multiple occasions so why even discuss something who's authenticity can't be verified.

Hmmm, I can't seem to find Mark 19 in my version. And I fail to see what Jesus' view about adultery has got to do with his sexual orientation anyway. Oh so Jesus had a special spiritual relationship with just one particular disciple along with a physical one. And is the naked boy in Mark's secret gospel the same one who was stalking Jesus (Mark 14:51)?

You won't either. In my haste I typed Mark instead or Matthew. I apologize for that mistake. The bible does not say Jesus had a special 'physical relationship' with the disciple. There is no verse that says this. Until Mark's secret gospel is proven to be legitiment, I see no need to even debate it. Right now there are serious doubts about its authenticity.

The bible doesn't say that Jesus had a special spiritual relationship with that particular disciple either and certainly doesn't indicate that he was a heterosexual. And how can you also authenticate the rest of the bible, particularly the supernatural nonsense and magic bits? But either way, Jesus didn't mention anything about homosexuality, apart from Matt 19:12, let alone condemned it.

[Goat]

[Replying to post 249 by charles_hamm]

I take notice of the testimonies of the millions of homosexuals about their sexual orientation and not of those who reject those testimonies. Same same with the testimonials of trans-sexuals and other cases of intersex.

Is the relationship of an hermaphrodite with a man and/or a woman a heterosexual or homosexual relationship?

Will you also take notice of the testimonies of those who say they have changed their sexual orientation and that it was a choice for them or will you discard them?

Already answered this.

I will particularly pay attention to those who made that claim, then 'regress' and admit they really didn't. .. such as two of the founders of exodus international who 'found' each other there.

Will you also pay attention to the ones who don't 'regress' and remain heterosexual as well or will you discard them?

I suspect that many of those were bi-sexual to start with.

Or, don't you believe that bisexuals exist.

I also know that there is a great deal of pressure to be 'straight', rather than an alternative lifestyle.

I also know that when minors are forced to go through conversion therapy, there is a high level of suicide and drug use after that.. much much higher than the populations of gays and bi's that don't go through that.

[mitty]

[Replying to post 252 by charles_hamm]

And what type of hormone therapy is that? Does it make those genetically male persons with Swyer syndrome start menstruating and ovulating?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_gonadal_dysgenesis

Estrogen and progesterone therapy. Menstruating yes, ovulating I am unsure about.

So what's the difference between the hormone treatment of those with Swyer syndrome (ie genetically male) and a trans-sexual who's genitals are surgically changed to match their gender identity. And I can assure you that the unformed testes of someone with Swyer syndrome will not start ovulating, and if they did what would be the fate of the 25% of all embryos with a YY sex-chromosome configuration. And it doesn't matter if someone with Swyer syndrome is referred to as a girl, they are still genetically male.

A trans-sexual self identifies his/her gender so that is strictly a matter of choice. There is nothing in his/her anatomy to necessitate the surgery. A person with Swyer syndrome has a condition that can be treated with the therapies I listed. That condition necessitates the treatment.

If a person tells you they have Swyer syndrome and tells you they are female, are you going to dispute them? If so then doesn't that wipe out the whole notion of self identifying gender?

If a genetically-male trans-sexual surgically changes his genitals to female ones to match his female gender identity and has a relationship with a normal man, is that a heterosexual or homosexual relationship?

[charles_hamm]

[Replying to post 252 by charles_hamm]

And what type of hormone therapy is that? Does it make those genetically male persons with Swyer syndrome start menstruating and ovulating?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_gonadal_dysgenesis

Estrogen and progesterone therapy. Menstruating yes, ovulating I am unsure about.

So what's the difference between the hormone treatment of those with Swyer syndrome (ie genetically male) and a trans-sexual who's genitals are surgically changed to match their gender identity. And I can assure you that the unformed testes of someone with Swyer syndrome will not start ovulating, and if they did what would be the fate of the 25% of all embryos with a YY sex-chromosome configuration. And it doesn't matter if someone with Swyer syndrome is referred to as a girl, they are still genetically male.

A trans-sexual self identifies his/her gender so that is strictly a matter of choice. There is nothing in his/her anatomy to necessitate the surgery. A person with Swyer syndrome has a condition that can be treated with the therapies I listed. That condition necessitates the treatment.

If a person tells you they have Swyer syndrome and tells you they are female, are you going to dispute them? If so then doesn't that wipe out the whole notion of self identifying gender?

No treatment of Swyer syndrome can alter the fact that they are genetically male. Can you change your gender identity at will, and do you dream that you are a male person in some of your dreams and a female person in other dreams, or do you think your gender identity is set at birth?

If a person tells you they are a genetically-male trans-sexual who has had a sex-change operation to match their gender identity and tells you that they are female, are you going to dispute that and tell that person to use the male lavatories instead of the female lavatories?

I'll address your questions once you have answered mine. It's a simple question. Will you dispute them or agree with them?

[charles_hamm]

[Replying to post 250 by charles_hamm] That's just your opinion that he wasn't referring to homosexual bed-chamber attendants and also to his own sexual orientation.

No it's a fact. Jesus did not say in the verse you used that these men were homosexuals. It's not an opinion at all. You are trying to do what Christians are accused of all the time; read Jesus' mind. Also please show where Jesus said He was a homosexual.

Have you ever consulted Jesus or the gospel writers about this or is it just wishful thinking? Where does the bible say he was a heterosexual or even indicate he was a heterosexual? Afterall he was susposedly an unmarried man of thirty when marriage was the norm, and that he had a special relationship with one particular disciple and what really happened with the naked boy in Mark's secret gospel?

If you read Mark 19 you would see that Jesus clearly states marriage is between a man and a woman and says it would be better not to marry than to cause a woman to commit adultery. Being an unmarried man does not indicate He was homosexual. The "beloved disciple" has nothing to do with sexuality. It is about the spiritual relationship they had. Mark's secret gospel has been called a forgery on multiple occasions so why even discuss something who's authenticity can't be verified.

Hmmm, I can't seem to find Mark 19 in my version. And I fail to see what Jesus' view about adultery has got to do with his sexual orientation anyway. Oh so Jesus had a special spiritual relationship with just one particular disciple along with a physical one. And is the naked boy in Mark's secret gospel the same one who was stalking Jesus (Mark 14:51)?

You won't either. In my haste I typed Mark instead or Matthew. I apologize for that mistake. The bible does not say Jesus had a special 'physical relationship' with the disciple. There is no verse that says this. Until Mark's secret gospel is proven to be legitiment, I see no need to even debate it. Right now there are serious doubts about its authenticity.

The bible doesn't say that Jesus had a special spiritual relationship with that particular disciple either and certainly doesn't indicate that he was a heterosexual. And how can you also authenticate the rest of the bible, particularly the supernatural nonsense and magic bits? But either way, Jesus didn't mention anything about homosexuality, apart from Matt 19:12, let alone condemned it.

Actually if you really want to be technical the bible indicates Jesus was celibate, if we are considering that it doesn't directly say Jesus' sexuality. The bible can be authenticated to at least have been written in the 1st century A.D., some of it anyway. Mark's secret gospel, as it is called, has been studied and there are secular scholars who believe it is a forgery, created in the 18th or 19th century. You keep misusing Matt 19:12 when it has no application to our discussion. There is no mention of homosexuality in Matt 19:12. Now Matt 19:4-6 says marriage is between a man and a woman so if you want to use Matt 19 we can bring that in to our conversation as well.

[charles_hamm]

[Replying to post 249 by charles_hamm]

I take notice of the testimonies of the millions of homosexuals about their sexual orientation and not of those who reject those testimonies. Same same with the testimonials of trans-sexuals and other cases of intersex.

Is the relationship of an hermaphrodite with a man and/or a woman a heterosexual or homosexual relationship?

Will you also take notice of the testimonies of those who say they have changed their sexual orientation and that it was a choice for them or will you discard them?

Already answered this.

I will particularly pay attention to those who made that claim, then 'regress' and admit they really didn't. .. such as two of the founders of exodus international who 'found' each other there.

Will you also pay attention to the ones who don't 'regress' and remain heterosexual as well or will you discard them?

I suspect that many of those were bi-sexual to start with.

Or, don't you believe that bisexuals exist.

I also know that there is a great deal of pressure to be 'straight', rather than an alternative lifestyle.

I also know that when minors are forced to go through conversion therapy, there is a high level of suicide and drug use after that.. much much higher than the populations of gays and bi's that don't go through that.

Correct me if I am wrong, but it sounds like you will not believe these people when they say they have changed their sexual orientation. Whether I believe bi-sexuals exist or not is not relevant because you are only speculating that they were bi-sexual to start with.

Who brought up conversion therapy for minors? Conversion therapy should only be offered to people over the age of 18 who want to voluntarily go through it. It should not be forced on anyone.

[charles_hamm]

[Replying to post 252 by charles_hamm]

And what type of hormone therapy is that? Does it make those genetically male persons with Swyer syndrome start menstruating and ovulating?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_gonadal_dysgenesis

Estrogen and progesterone therapy. Menstruating yes, ovulating I am unsure about.

So what's the difference between the hormone treatment of those with Swyer syndrome (ie genetically male) and a trans-sexual who's genitals are surgically changed to match their gender identity. And I can assure you that the unformed testes of someone with Swyer syndrome will not start ovulating, and if they did what would be the fate of the 25% of all embryos with a YY sex-chromosome configuration. And it doesn't matter if someone with Swyer syndrome is referred to as a girl, they are still genetically male.

A trans-sexual self identifies his/her gender so that is strictly a matter of choice. There is nothing in his/her anatomy to necessitate the surgery. A person with Swyer syndrome has a condition that can be treated with the therapies I listed. That condition necessitates the treatment.

If a person tells you they have Swyer syndrome and tells you they are female, are you going to dispute them? If so then doesn't that wipe out the whole notion of self identifying gender?

If a genetically-male trans-sexual surgically changes his genitals to female ones to match his female gender identity and has a relationship with a normal man, is that a heterosexual or homosexual relationship?

For the trans-sexual it is a homosexual relationship because he was born with male genitalia and chose to go against his natural anatomy to change his gender identity to what he wanted. For the other man, it depends on whether the trans-sexual told him that he had the surgery and had male genitals before the surgery. To some extent it also depends on how the normal man views gender identity as to whether he considers it to be homosexual for him as well.

[mitty]

[Replying to post 275 by charles_hamm] Despite your protests, the bible indicates that Jesus probably wasn't a heterosexual and that he had a drinking problem.