Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

How can people think homosexuality is a choice?

Announcements Posted on
    • 21 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bad8oy)
    i am confused are you backing me or him?
    This in and of itself shows your inability to comprehend basic usages of english syntax. I think this speaks for itself as to your capability of making any logically-based, research-informed arguments or statements. The sentence in question was very clearly and syntactically sensible.
    • 21 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bad8oy)
    i am a muslim :bhangra:
    I'm going to post this in advance:

    Quoting scriptures or using any type of religious argument as to the supposed unnaturalness or wrongness of homosexuality is invalid - as your argument presupposes (1) A metaphysical, all-powerful being exists (2) Said being can interact with the objective 'real world' (2) Said being cares about the daily activities of humans, and so on and so forth.

    Such an argument is too presumptuous to be sound.
    • 21 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wickersham)
    Wow NYU, you're brutal ...
    I try
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bad8oy)
    i am a muslim :bhangra:
    So it's just your religion which tells you it's wrong. That's fine.

    As long as it isn't a valid scientifically-based empirically valid reason
    • 21 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dmon1Unlimited)
    Where im from, the comment he made is called a 'par', which is translated to mean the word "owned" :pierre:
    though my translations are a bit iffy...
    I'll have to rep you tomorrow, as I have none left for today
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NYU2012)
    I'm going to post this in advance:

    Quoting scriptures or using any type of religious argument as to the supposed unnaturalness or wrongness of homosexuality is invalid - as your argument presupposes (1) A metaphysical, all-powerful being exists (2) Said being can interact with the objective 'real world' (2) Said being cares about the daily activities of humans, and so on and so forth.

    Such an argument is too presumptuous to be sound.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	charlie-sheen-winning.png 
Views:	5 
Size:	142.8 KB 
ID:	132826
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Miracle Day)
    I just had a heated argument with some guy, and my frustration is what angered me to write this. He told me, for accepting gays and being cool with them, and treating them as I would anyone else I'm not a proper Christian - infact probably not one at all - because the Bible condemns them. He says we should all use Jesus as a model human.

    I tell him about Lady Gaga born this way and he was adamant people aren't born gay, but they're brought up fooled.

    I then ask how homosexuality can be a choice, when homophobic areas have higher suicide rates and by his logic surely they could just change back to being straight if it was a choice. He then says he wishes more homosexuals would commit suicide, and that homosexuals don't think they can turn straight.

    So I tell him, Jesus tells us to love all.. so saying that is going against Christianity etc. Then he quotes Sodomy and Gamora.

    He's obviously not just a closed minded pre-teen.. he knows his stuff. I just can't comprehend how people can believe it.

    If any of you believe it's a choice.. help me out and tell me why please.

    Edit: I'm just so angry right now.. sorry.. someone restore my faith in humanity
    Well basically because all there is is the majority of gay people saying 'it's not a choice' and most straight people being somewhere in the middle.

    One could easily point to periods in time where it appears that either less people would be gay, or where gay people managed to marry, have babies and live a straight life.

    And also bum sex in prisons/on ships etc.

    Basically, no one has proved or found what makes people gay, so apart from opinion it's all up in the air.
    • 9 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I never made a conscious decision to be straight.

    Exactly the same can be applied for gay people.

    I'm not going to go down the route of 'nobody would choose to be gay', because that's pretty darn offensive, but we certainly don't have control of our sexuality - concious control, that is.

    No amount of test attempting to prove the contrary will convince me.
    • 16 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gales)
    I'm happy to hear that, it means you'll never live in the UK. Happy days! :woo:
    I'm saddened lewis I still like britain, despite the gay laws.

    (Original post by Wickersham)
    Honestly, I don't get why anyone would have any reason to be "deeply annoyed" by legalizing same-sex marriage.

    Also, ironically enough, my favourite gay series is set in Pittsburgh. Go figure!
    It's not ironic really, this city is getting worse. I saw ANOTHER church with a gay rainbow flag outside. And to think that this is my OWN neighborhood.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I'm an atheist so (happily) no longer have to have these sorts of arguments with most people. However, I'm going to give my most Christian-friendly response. The sort of things I used to say before I questioned my faith.

    I will say, if you believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible then a) good luck working that out, and b) yes, you are going against your religion by supporting gay rights.

    However, most reasonable Christians acknowledge that a lot of the Bible is allegorical and some of it (like the creation story) should not be taken literally. They will also often use the (fairly valid) argument that Jesus fulfilled the laws of the Old Testament and effectively rewrote them with 'Love God and love others' (obviously paraphrasing), which is why they don't follow kosher laws and things like that. This would make the Sodom and Gomorrah argument, as well as the Leviticus argument, irrelevant.

    Being even more broad with their understanding, clever Christians (in my opinion) will also acknowledge that the Bible was not written by God. It was written by fallible humans who, even if they didn't intend to, wrote their own meanings into the text. For example, my mother is a Catholic yet believes that Paul was a sexist and thus doesn't like some of his teachings and does not treat them as divine.

    Think about the time these people lived in, and the fact that their main aim was conversion. Nowadays, politicians are probably the most ambitious to convert people; people ask them difficult questions, and they try their hardest to make their policies reflect what most people already believe or want. If you were Paul, trying to convert Romans (mainly Jewish Romans who were strongly against homosexuality) to Christianity, you would almost definitely claim that they could follow Christ and still keep the morals they were brought up with. To be honest, I'm surprised there aren't more anti-gay passages in the Bible, and the fact that there aren't makes me think Jesus probably said sod all on the matter.

    Even now I'm an atheist, I think the sort of Christianity God would be most happy with is liberal Christianity. The ten Commandments are pretty sound, so is 'Love thy neighbour', so why not just follow the general jist of peace, faith, love and truth? It seems so pointless to argue over the nitty gritty of anything when it causes so much conflict.

    EDIT: To relate this back to the original point, I don't believe people choose to be gay but, even if they do, the above reasons mean you can still support them and be a good Christian regardless.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    I doubt very few Christians would try and claim that homosexual urges are a choice but they'd argue that homosexual actions are a choice (in which they are technically correct).

    (Original post by SoberFox)
    I doubt you have any data to support this.
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    Well it's the official teaching of the Roman Catholic CHurch that makes up over half of all of Christianity and also the teaching of the Eastern Orthodox Churches which make up the next largest group. On those figures alone my point is proved correct. My point would better be put as a minority of Christians believe that homosexual urges are a choice but my point still stands.

    I don't know why so many people have a problem with this stance... they seem to think differentiating between act and desire is somehow problematic?


    (Original post by ThePhilosoraptor)
    If you are Catholic you will no doubt be familiar with the words ot the Catechism of the Catholic Church on this matter;

    CCC 2358: "The number of men and women who have deep seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible... They must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfil God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition."
    The Catholic Church does teach that homosexuality is not a sin in itself, however it holds a position that views acting on an innate homosexual desire as sinful. (If for no other reason than because all sex outside of marriage is sinful and homosexual marriage is not possible within the Catholic church)

    Let's not forget that sexual identities didn't really exist until the mid nineteenth century (Foucault, History of Sexualit vol. 1, 1979) when psycho-analysis started to categorise people based on their desires. Up until that point sex was an action - not a desire which would be pathologised and studied. So any analysis before these categories - and thus ways of understanding behaviour - were introduced is historically invalid. (As is the claim that there have been homosexuals throughout history; depending upon time and culture people would have viewed their acts entirely differently. The Greeks, for example, did not regard sexual attraction between men as homosexual but as pedagogical and would have resented the implications of us foisting our understanding upon them)
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThePhilosoraptor)
    I don't know why so many people have a problem with this stance... they seem to think differentiating between act and desire is somehow problematic?




    The Catholic Church does teach that homosexuality is not a sin in itself, however it holds a position that views acting on an innate homosexual desire as sinful. (If for no other reason than because all sex outside of marriage is sinful and homosexual marriage is not possible within the Catholic church)

    Let's not forget that sexual identities didn't really exist until the mid nineteenth century (Foucault, History of Sexualit vol. 1, 1979) when psycho-analysis started to categorise people based on their desires. Up until that point sex was an action - not a desire which would be pathologised and studied. So any analysis before these categories - and thus ways of understanding behaviour - were introduced is historically invalid. (As is the claim that there have been homosexuals throughout history; depending upon time and culture people would have viewed their acts entirely differently. The Greeks, for example, did not regard sexual attraction between men as homosexual but as pedagogical and would have resented the implications of us foisting our understanding upon them)
    Please do not quote me unless you have actually read what I wrote. Nowhere did I claim that regarding homosexual acts but not desires as "sinful" is problematic. His line of argument however that what the Catholic and the Orthodox Churches teach is what their followers actually believe is completely false as I have demonstrated in my reply to him.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The thing that upsets me is why do people care why someone is gay...who is the gay person hurting??
    Argh it's like the Muslim guy who was arrested for preaching homophobic cr*p...why was he so bothered??? If he doesn't like homosexuality then he should make sure he doesn't sleep with men and tada move on with his life.
    I'm Muslim myself, Im not affected by homosexuality in anyway. Live and let live. And nowhere in the Quran does it give a punishment for homosexuality. Only says that it's not right and that people should repent that's all. Doesn't say that all Muslims should make it their business to go around judging and condemning people.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SoberFox)
    So to sum up:

    1. The Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church do not teach that homosexuality is a choice.
    2. Catholics and Orthodox Christians make the majority of Christians.
    3. 100% of the Catholics and Orthodox Christians believe whatever their Churches teach.
    Therefore the majority of Christians do not believe that homosexuality is a choice.
    Therefore only a minority of Christians believe that homosexuality is a choice.

    I deny that point 3 is correct. In fact, the majority of Catholics do not really believe in the official teachings of the Church. They do not, for example, regard homosexual acts as sinful. 56% of American Catholics belive that homosexual relations are not sinful. Is that the "official teaching" of the Church?
    And since when was the American Catholic Church the be all and end all. And by the way, most of those Catholics believe that because they mistakenly think the Church doesn't teach what it teaches (bad Catechises), therefore you really can't count them. Secondly, the Catholic Church isn't a democracy. Thirdly in the areas where Catholicism is growing (Africa, Asia, Latin America) you will find that these teachings are applied to. Young Catholics, the future of the Church, believe these teachings far more than their parents did.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SoberFox)
    Please do not quote me unless you have actually read what I wrote. Nowhere did I claim that regarding homosexual acts but not desires as "sinful" is problematic. His line of argument however that what the Catholic and the Orthodox Churches teach is what their followers actually believe is completely false as I have demonstrated in my reply to him.
    His line of argument was nothing of the sort. The argument ran that few christians would say homosexuality is a choice even if to act on it is. The supporting data was Catholic Catechesis.

    Your line of argument is that if the membership of the church does not believe the teaching then it does not hold - but by that logic surely we have to admit the rightness of more extreme views (such as the one that homosexuality can be cured) based on the number of adherents?

    Either a view is inherently right or wrong, or it's value is determined democratically. Personally I'm not fussed which it is, but I think it makes for clearer argument if we stick to one way of evaluating these ideas.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    And since when was the American Catholic Church the be all and end all. And by the way, most of those Catholics believe that because they mistakenly think the Church doesn't teach what it teaches (bad Catechises), therefore you really can't count them. Secondly, the Catholic Church isn't a democracy. Thirdly in the areas where Catholicism is growing (Africa, Asia, Latin America) you will find that these teachings are applied to. Young Catholics, the future of the Church, believe these teachings far more than their parents did.
    Now ofc you're changing the subject.

    Here's what you said earlier in response to my query whether you had any data to support the notion that most Christians do not believe that homosexuality is a choice.

    Well it's the official teaching of the Roman Catholic CHurch that makes up over half of all of Christianity and also the teaching of the Eastern Orthodox Churches which make up the next largest group. On those figures alone my point is proved correct. My point would better be put as a minority of Christians believe that homosexual urges are a choice but my point still stands.
    You didn't distinguish between knowledgeable Catholics and ignorant ones. So to include them now is to acknowledge my point. It does not follow that because the two largest Churches hold a certain view that their followers also hold this view. Which is really what you said above. I am not sure why you think this is a point in your favour.

    American Catholics are not the be all and end all. I was simply pointing out that, again, you were including them in your statistics.

    I fail to see how the Catholic Church not being a democracy is relevant to my view. Perhaps you can explain.

    Regarding the developing areas and their relationship to Catholicism. Maybe that's right, maybe not, it still does not lend support to your earlier point which was that you knew most Christians do not think homosexuality is a choice because most Christians are Catholics/Orthodox and these two Churches teach that homosexuality is not a choice.

    As I said this does not follow. Maybe most Christians believe that but not because of the Church's teachings.

    To be clear: I was simply asking for data. I do not take either view but your argument was fallacious.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThePhilosoraptor)
    His line of argument was nothing of the sort. The argument ran that few christians would say homosexuality is a choice even if to act on it is. The supporting data was Catholic Catechesis.

    Your line of argument is that if the membership of the church does not believe the teaching then it does not hold - but by that logic surely we have to admit the rightness of more extreme views (such as the one that homosexuality can be cured) based on the number of adherents?
    .
    Show me where I said that. You really didn't read my post. In fact, I never claimed that.

    And no his argument was that most Christians believe homosexuality (yes homosexual desires) not to be a choice cos their Churches teach that homosexuality is not a choice & most Christians are either Catholic or Orthodox.

    What I said was that this simply does not follow. For a whole bunch of reasons, Catholics may believe different things. He even said it himself. Catholics can be ignorant of the Church's teachings and so they may support different views that are contrary to the official teachings of the Church they belong. E.g. Most American Catholics (54%) do not believe that homosexual acts are sinful.
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SoberFox)
    Now ofc you're changing the subject.
    But I'm not.

    Here's what you said earlier in response to my query whether you had any data to support the notion that most Christians do not believe that homosexuality is a choice.
    But they're views have no impact. They may not follow the rules but they're still the blasted rules.


    You didn't distinguish between knowledgeable Catholics and ignorant ones
    Well actually there's three groups, not two as you claim. There's orthodox Catholics (those who know and follow teaching), ignorant Catholics (those who don't know and don't follow teaching), and heretics (those who know and don't follow teaching). Seeing as the largest are the first two and the latter of those two is only that way because of lack of knowledge rather than any free will choice my point stands.

    American Catholics are not the be all and end all. I was simply pointing out that, again, you were including them in your statistics.
    And I was right to do so.

    I fail to see how the Catholic Church not being a democracy is relevant to my view. Perhaps you can explain.
    Because those doctorines and dogma don't change because of public opinion. The funny thing is that recent events in the USA illistrate my point perfectly.

    Regarding the developing areas and their relationship to Catholicism. Maybe that's right, maybe not
    I am.
    , it still does not lend support to your earlier point which was that you knew most Christians do not think homosexuality is a choice because most Christians are Catholics/Orthodox and these two Churches teach that homosexuality is not a choice.
    Well it does somewhat. That's the point, the issue is of knowing, as opposed to not knowing. And anyway, if you want to take it back to it's original points and not include the ignorant or heretical Catholics who are not opposed to SSRs then the point still stands that of those Christians opposed to homosexual relations will be for those reasons and not the ignorant ones you gave.


    The simple fact is is that you're wrong. Stop trying to find problems and holes where there aren't any. Now I suggest we leave it there.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)


    But they're views have no impact. They may not follow the rules but they're still the blasted rules.
    Huh?

    Well actually there's three groups, not two as you claim. There's orthodox Catholics (those who know and follow teaching), ignorant Catholics (those who don't know and don't follow teaching), and heretics (those who know and don't follow teaching). Seeing as the largest are the first two and the latter of those two is only that way because of lack of knowledge rather than any free will choice my point stands.
    I didn't claim anything. You put this point forward. You can distinguish between as many groups as you like, I fail to see how this is relevant.

    Because those doctorines and dogma don't change because of public opinion. The funny thing is that recent events in the USA illistrate my point perfectly.
    Where did I say that dogma changes because of public opinion?
    Well it does somewhat. That's the point, the issue is of knowing, as opposed to not knowing. And anyway, if you want to take it back to it's original points and not include the ignorant or heretical Catholics who are not opposed to SSRs then the point still stands that of those Christians opposed to homosexual relations will be for those reasons and not the ignorant ones you gave.
    Again, I didn't give any reasons. You did.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SoberFox)
    Show me where I said that. You really didn't read my post. In fact, I never claimed that.

    And no his argument was that most Christians believe homosexuality (yes homosexual desires) not to be a choice cos their Churches teach that homosexuality is not a choice & most Christians are either Catholic or Orthodox.

    What I said was that this simply does not follow. For a whole bunch of reasons, Catholics may believe different things. He even said it himself. Catholics can be ignorant of the Church's teachings and so they may support different views that are contrary to the official teachings of the Church they belong. E.g. Most American Catholics (54%) do not believe that homosexual acts are sinful.
    If you would like me to extend a charitable reading of your arguments, perhaps you would do the same for Adam?

    You oversimplify his argument - completely ignoring the distinction drawn between desires and acts - and also miss the salient point (which I feel must be deliberate); that the largest Christian Churches all adopt the same stance and it is only a few extreme sects who believe homosexuality is a choice or that it can be cured.
Updated: February 26, 2012
New on TSR

Ways to improve university

Should university be free and harder to get in to?

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.