Why do people commonly cite the unchosen nature of homosexuality in its defence?

Whenever homosexuality is included in debate it is invariably raised that it isn't a 'choice', as if that should act as a defence for it and a reason to be accepting of it. It's as if people are suggesting that if people had a choice of sexuality and chose to be gay they would somehow be more deserving of rebuke than if it were an unchosen and unchangeable part of their nature. I find it strange that the unchosen nature of homosexuality should always be included as a supporting reason to tolerate it.

I would be interested to hear what others have to say about this.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 1

KingStannis

3

No because i don't think what people do in their own homes is anyone else's business as long as it doesn't hurt anyone. If two people of the same sex chose to find each other attractive, and acted on their artificial attraction in a way that doesn't harm anybody, I fail to see an issue.

However, My view on religious nonacceptance of homosexuality would change dramatically. If homosexuality is a choice, then it is reasonable for religions to find that choice immoral, just as they find they choice of not accepting their God immoral. So long as their beliefs aren't forced on others.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 2

cambio wechsel

20

If it were a choice, I'd choose it. Honestly I feel cheated out of it - slim, fashion conscious, fastidious in my habits - and have throughout my adult life been given reason to suppose that I'd be quite the popular boy.

Reply 3

DiddyDec01

3

If it were a choice I would still have no problem with it. In fact I would probably partake in it.

Surely your argument could also be applied to race considering that is not a choice either.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 4

HigherMinion

5

>if

You always have a choice to act on your desires.

Reply 5

ilem

17

Definitely not. I find it utterly irrelevant whether sexual orientation stems from choice or genetics; people should have the liberty to have consensual relationships with whatever adults they want to.

Reply 6

Evening

3

If it were then it leaves itself open to criticism from those who have persecuted homosexuals in the past. If it were a choice then homophobia would be pointless as anyone could just say 'If you hate homophobia just choose to be straight'.

Reply 7

StarvingAutist

17

No. Whether it's a choice or not, it doesn't harm anybody.

Reply 8

Illiberal Liberal

2

Original post by HigherMinion

>if

You always have a choice to act on your desires.

He meant the very being gay being a choice.

Reply 9

lucaf

13

Good point, never thought of that. And nope, even if it is a choice it isn't a choice that affects me.

Reply 10

anarchism101

17

Personally I view it as a preference, in the same way you have a favourite colour or like particular foods; these are by no means genetic or inherent, but it would seem odd to refer to this as a 'choice'.

I appreciate that I'm speaking as a straight guy, and fair enough, it made a lot of sense for gay people to promote the 'born this way' defence when they were struggling for some form of acceptance, but I feel in the long run it has created the view that being gay is something bad, rather than an equally valid orientation.

Reply 11

jaffacake111

9

The "it's natural" argument is spectacularly weak.

Well so what? Everything that appears in nature (which is everything that actually exists) is natural by that logic and therefore must be right. Wrong! There are no absolutes and you'll have to fogive my mild imposture in saying so.

To clarify - this is not an argument against homosexuality as I personally take no issue with it. Point is "nature" argument a bad one. Again so what? Next thing you'll be telling me is that the world is a dangerous place!

I know I am being picky and this is in no way an attack on homosexuals. As I often say... am personally very glad we do not have to live in a Darwinian society as nature would dictate and that we can choose to forgo our "selfish genes".

Reply 12

Birkenhead

OP

3

Original post by DiddyDec

If it were a choice I would still have no problem with it. In fact I would probably partake in it.

Surely your argument could also be applied to race considering that is not a choice either.

What 'argument'? All I've said is that people commonly raise the fact that sexuality isn't a choice when debating homosexuality from a sympathetic standpoint - I'm just keen to explore why this is etc.

Reply 13

Birkenhead

OP

3

Original post by HigherMinion

>if

You always have a choice to act on your desires.

You don't have the choice of what your sexuality is, however.

Reply 14

Birkenhead

OP

3

Original post by ilem

Definitely not. I find it utterly irrelevant whether sexual orientation stems from choice or genetics; people should have the liberty to have consensual relationships with whatever adults they want to.

Original post by StarvingAutist

No. Whether it's a choice or not, it doesn't harm anybody.

Original post by lucaf

Good point, never thought of that. And nope, even if it is a choice it isn't a choice that affects me.

And yet we've probably all at some point said or nodded in agreement with someone saying 'It's not as if it's a choice'...why?

Original post by jaffacake111

The "it's natural" argument is spectacularly weak.

Well so what? Everything that appears in nature (which is everything that actually exists) is natural by that logic and therefore must be right. Wrong! There are no absolutes and you'll have to fogive my mild imposture in saying so.

To clarify - this is not an argument against homosexuality as I personally take no issue with it. Point is "nature" argument a bad one. Again so what? Next thing you'll be telling me is that the world is a dangerous place!

I know I am being picky and this is in no way an attack on homosexuals. As I often say... am personally very glad we do not have to live in a Darwinian society as nature would dictate and that we can choose to forgo our "selfish genes".

Surely the point is that if homosexuals are born with these desires, whatever you might think of them, it is unfair to call them immoral for satisfying them when they never chose to have them. This is why the 'they never chose it' argument always seems to me to be catering to homophobes who think the acts are wrong.