Homosexuality, sin, choice or biology?

[Odin11]

I've looked a little into the process that was oral tradition, and while you don't trust it, I do.

Have you ever played the game chinese whispers (also known as telephone, operator, grapevine, broken telephone, whisper down the lane, gossip, secret message, the messenger game and pass the message)? Its were you whisper a phrase down a line of people and compare the original and final messages to see how they changed. When I've played it the original and final messages were unrecognizable, and that is just with a span of 10 mins. or so and 25 people. Now imagine what years and 1000s of people can do to a concept and how corrupted it can become by indirect communication.

[+Link of Hyrule]

Have you ever played the game chinese whispers (also known as telephone, operator, grapevine, broken telephone, whisper down the lane, gossip, secret message, the messenger game and pass the message)? Its were you whisper a phrase down a line of people and compare the original and final messages to see how they changed. When I've played it the original and final messages were unrecognizable, and that is just with a span of 10 mins. or so and 25 people. Now imagine what years and 1000s of people can do to a concept and how corrupted it can become by indirect communication.

Telephone/Chinese Whispers works to corrupt a message because they only get to hear it once, and it's usually a complicated set of phrases that no person could rightfully be said to memorise in one hearing. Thus after going through 20 or 25 whispers, of course it's going to be totally garbled at the other end.

This is not oral tradition. Oral tradition is a discipline. With the Jewish Mishnah (oral tradition of the Rabbi's from about 100BC-200AD), the Jews set up schools where people were trained in rote memorisation, utilising mnemonic devices to make it easier to remember, and many other techniques. And while no such evidence of a school exists for early Christian tradition, many argue that such a formal school was unnecessary because it was the teachings of only one Rabbi, and therefore didn't need a formal school. Remember, the earliest Christian converts were Jews, so they knew the process of oral tradition. Then those who had memorised the gospel were sent out as teachers, to preach the words of Jesus to others.

So with respect, I totally reject the comparison between oral tradition and Chinese Whispers. They are not the same thing at all, not even remotely. A better comparison would be if took those 25 people, got them all together at once, and told them the phrase, using rhythmic devices and language that would make it easier to stick in the brain, and then had them repeat it, over and over and over and over and over and over and over, until they were absolutely perfect. Then they go each to 25 people and repeat it to them, over and over and over and over, until they can say it in their sleep. Then bring all 625 people back together and ask them what the passage was. All of them will tell you virtually the same thing. Ok, send those 625 people out to teach another 25 people word for word, letting them repeat it over and over and over, 15,625 will come back and tell you the exact same thing, virtually word for word. Of course, not everyone has a fantastic mind for rote memorisation, so filter out those who don't do so well, and send out only those who seem to have a gift for it. I'll be conservative and say only 10% of those who hear it have the ability to transmit it onward. That's still 1,562 people who can recite the phrase virtually word-perfect. And those are the ones who are taken as the teachers, and sent to tell the message to others.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Paranoid Android

[+Link of Hyrule]

I disagree. Ponder this for a moment..

Jesus talks to me about heterosexual marriage but because he didn't talk about homosexual marriage, I have chosen to add a new spin to what he said and assumed his view on homosexuals and put words into his mouth and now that is what is passed on...

Ah, but you have people who have heard this message before, and you saying something suddenly new that no one's heard of before, how long will it be before you get found out? Especially if you go to a town with a fellow colleague, you're both preaching the same message and someone says "Hang on, that other guy said nothing about what you're saying here, what's the deal"?

Other than that, we could choose to believe that those who were charged with rote memorisation intentionally changed his words, but you're left with several pesky questions, the least of which is "prove it" (ok, technically that's not a question, but that's life, I guess )

Edited June 3, 2013 by Paranoid Android

[Jor-el]

How can you call something natural yet at the same time a deviance. It doesn't compute. IMO I think this is where you are in your cognitive quest of trying to find a way to be 'true' to your religion and accepting of something other then hetero.. it seems to me you need to have a "biological" reason for homosexuality in order for it to be valid in your mind. (Of course this is just what I think and I could be wrong)

Natural and deviance are two specific words. Homosexuality can be considered natural in that it exists in nature, but it is a genetic deviance from the norm.

I hate to break it to you but "hetero" is not the cats meow of sexuality my friend-- it is one of four. It would be like me arguing that as a female I am better then you because males have very little part in the female ability to carry a life to term and give birth. It would be as if I was saying since you are a male and therefore you can never have the experience of growing a life inside of you, so you have no real biological survival use or importance. These arguments are elitist, ignorant, and non productive. IMO Wouldn't you agree?

Here is a link for you,

http://www.kinseyins...ak-hhscale.html

No I would not agree, what I perceive you are attempting, is to reconcile the fact that even though we can accept homosexuality in society, we need not accept it is a normal sexual behaviour. It is not. It is in fact a deviance from the norm, not merely a natural variation as so many people try to convince society. It is a fact that people are simply not willing to accept. But it remains a fact all the same.

The fact that it exists in nature does not make it any less deviant.

If I find that 1% of a population is susceptible to a particular illness, it is still a deviance from the norm. Look at the words as they are meant to be used, not what you somehow read into them.

There is no 'sexual' norm per say Jor el, it can be a tough concept to wrap ones mind around. One can be any of the four variations (or not) at different times in their lives. This would all be considered normal in the study of Human Sexuality.

I disagree wholeheartedly, I find that particular rationalization ineffective. The norm is found by function and biology, what contradicts that function and biology may be natural, but it is not the norm.

“Males do not represent two discrete populations, heterosexual and homosexual. The world is not to be divided into sheep and goats…The living world is a continuum in each and every one of its aspects."

“It is a characteristic of the human mind that tries to dichotomize in its classification of phenomena….Sexual behavior is either normal or abnormal, socially acceptable or unacceptable, heterosexual or homosexual; and many persons do not want to believe that there are gradations in these matters from one to the other extreme.”

Bottom line is there are 4 sexual expressions and not one is more normal then the other. That is the whole story biologically.

Please note Sheri that once again you are trying to justify a biological argument with a sociological defense, it ain't good enough.

[Space Commander Travis]

Surely it's so very obivous that Jesus only talked about marriage in the context of male/female relationships, because that's all that marriage was about. There was hardly any such thing as gay marriage in the 1st century middle east, was there. To assume from that that because he didn't specifically put his seal of approval on same-sex relationships, he condemned them, really is to put words into his mouth and thoughts into his head, surely.

[Jor-el]

I tossed a coin one day and said - Heads I'll be straight and only like guys..tails I'll swing the opposite way.. It came up heads, so it was an easy choice to make up my mind what sexuality I wished to have ..I was going to do the ole - Eeenie Meenie Minie Moe to help me chose my sexuality, but the coin toss was quicker lol I am just messing Jorel to add some humour..

Seriously though. and these are my own thoughts and observations......I don't think it is a choice to become a homosexual.. Not if so many took their lives because they knew it was not normal and all they did to try and be what is considered normal... Force it - Then you had those who forced themselves to date females and even marry them, thinking it would make the gay go away ..But these things cannot work.. I know if I forced myself to be with another woman and marry her, I would be miserable and couldn't stick it..It is not in me to be gay, I cannot get my head around it......Show your Hate - .I guess the same for those who are gay....Some have been known to spout hate over time towards fellow gays thinking that if they condition themselves to HATE it more, it may cure them...weird but I have read that once before..Got me wondering about Fred Phelps of the WBC lol

The bible.. In those days man didn't hold a general understanding, ( not much different from so many today) so as the saying goes - Man fears what he/she does not understand.. It's in our nature to be that way too

So, because it looks odd and not natural to them back them, they thought it was against God...Same for the people today who are greatly against it.....No change there.... So I do not think it is wrong to look down on those in the days of the bible who condemned homosexuality, because they are no different from us today...

Considering that my cousin Sarah is the only gay on my dads side of the family, we know of no other ..I cannot say it is something that runs in the family...Gays do come from straight couples.. Yet I do laugh at those that say - "If they hang around with gays or raised with them, they will turn gay".. That is just an idiotic and dumb thing to say, yet for some reason I find their stupidity amusing..

Biology / Science - I think it could be some sort glitch with the X and Y chromosomes that determine whether we will be male of female.. The glitch could be IE - the X chromosome that makes you a male but faulty in a way that when you are born a male, later on in life as everything else take place, you could find you have female attributes some stronger than others ..So strong that the males find themselves attracted to the same gender, while those who are not effected as strong with the glitch, find that they can be a little feminine but still be 100% straight... It all depends.. I could be wrong, but they are just a few of my own thoughts.

Hi BM, I agree, especially with that last part of your opinion. It is a glitch, whether it is genetic or another form of biological phenomena we do not understand yet. Should we hate people for that glitch? No, we should accept them for who and what they are, but it is still a glitch.

[Odin11]

I've never met anybody with amber eyes that'd be cool. My eyes are a mix of green and blue, the colours sorta swirl into each other but they're really bold colours in their own right, never met anybody with the same. And never know what to put on forms if it asks my eyes colour #firstworldproblems

I love my eyes, they had gotten me more then my fair share of girls when I was in high school. And beyond. lol

My friend has eyes like that but she also has a ring of gold going around the middle of her iris. They are the most beautiful eyes I have ever seen. She calls her eyes blue hazel. I don't know if that is the right term or not but it works.

[+Sherapy]

That is exactly my point, your body is controlled by biology, it doesn't care that you seem to think that just because you live in a technological society you have all these different options open to you.

You can justify your thoughts based on that society, but in fact you are still controlled by biology, whether you agree or not in unimportant to that simple fact.

As I said, we are not, rational beings, we rationalize our actions and thoughts and then later on justify them as the correct path. We are rationalizing beings, not rational beings.

All you have said is rationalizing the obvious, that we are controlled by our biology. If you think otherwise then you have to justify homosexuality on that basis because objectively speaking everyone knows that it leads to a dead end biologically.

There isn't any way around this, if homosexuals do insist in that course of action they need to rationalize it this fact away as unimportant, forgetting that a species does not thrive on dead end biology.

Biology controls them too.

Every time you fall in love or think about sex, it does not lead to actual sex, but again it is a biological expression of the desire to do so. The biology is not merely in the act, it is in the thoughts and actions that lead you to that desire. Hormone levels, increase the desire which makes you think about it more. A look, an expression from a person you are attracted to will increase your blood pressure, all of it is a biological preparation for the act itself. naturally you and I don't realize this, we are rationalizing it in a different way, such as thinking about her eyes, or the way she walks.

In answer to your question, heterosexuals have a natural tendency in modern society to ignore the obvious. Since sex is no longer tied to reproduction, they think they can have the sex and not worry about reproduction until a later date when they somehow have a more stable life or feel prepared emotionally. Something the body does not consider at all since those are artificial constructs only a few centuries old. To the body you are still in the wild.

This freedom has some interesting repercussions. The more prominent of these is that heterosexuals later on have a lot more difficulty in actually having or accepting children, they in fact cut themselves off from what fulfills them emotionally, to other things that can fulfill them intellectually, such as a career.

Careers and sex then become surrogates that are used to try to fulfill that empty place in their hearts that they do not realize is the lack of emotional connection and fulfillment that is provided by other people such as children and even parents.

I know and can speak for myself as one of those many who once chose this type of path and it led to a deep dark place.

Your belief that there is more to life then having children is a reflection of your youth, if I may be so bold.

There is nothing wrong about wanting to mature and figure out who you are before you have children Jor el. In fact, it is a great idea. The commitment and energy that is devoted to parenting probably should not be taken lightly. Not everyone decides on this path though, it isn't for everyone in spite of their ability to reproduce. If someone decides to make their work their source of fulfillment I do not think they are less then in any way.

To put the kind of thought into having kids that Shadow is-- is a reflection of maturity and wisdom. There is more to some peoples lives then having children.For them, they serve and find meaning in other ways.

For ex: I am good at and enjoy parenting a lot, I think I should pay my kids for the privilege of this journey, it is so fun and the person I have had an opportunity to grow into is because of the experience of my kids, but it isn't' the only aspect of my life that brings meaning. I am very fortunate to be married to my best friend and 17 years into this we are madly in love with each other and we look forward to when it will just be us, we invest a lot of time into nurturing our relationship. I have many other aspects of my life that bring me fulfillment besides my kids, for me I think it would be burdensome to my kids if I limited myself to only being able to be fulfilled because of them, part of being an adult is having my own a sense of self too as it helps cultivate a perspective that is not limited to ego-centrism.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Sherapy

[Jor-el]

Most human traits exist on a spectrum. Intelligence, physical strength and (as mentioned) eye, hair and skin colour. Can you tell me why in none of those the majority does not matter?

Personally I have a thing against stupidity, so I couldn't be relied upon to offer an opinion on intelligence.

As for the others, they are many times used in a spectrum, it does not make it a legitimate usage of the technique.

Yet I could say that the norm is still the majority, now couldn't I?

What differentiates this from the actual debate we are having is that none of these characteristics are biological dead ends. Well... stupidity is also a biological dead end for a species.

[Jor-el]

Amber eyes are within the normal spectrum that human eyes can be. They're just very rare.

Then they are not the norm.

[shadowhive]

Personally I have a thing against stupidity, so I couldn't be relied upon to offer an opinion on intelligence.

As for the others, they are many times used in a spectrum, it does not make it a legitimate usage of the technique.

Yet I could say that the norm is still the majority, now couldn't I?

What differentiates this from the actual debate we are having is that none of these characteristics are biological dead ends. Well... stupidity is also a biological dead end for a species.

All you care about is the norm, the majority. Well we are not all identical. We are not like ants, or bees where every individual is identical (bar the queen's of the repective hives) we are a species where variation IS the norm, where everyone one of us is fundementally different. I'm not like you, nor am I like Odin. Or pa. Or rette. Each and every one of us is different, unique, individual.

The 'norm' is an illusion in human terms and utterly meaningly, because everyone is part of a minority in some way or another.

Biological dead ends? Only if all that matters is having a child. Which, it doesn't take much at all to see that that's not the case.

[Jor-el]

And yet in this technological society I have these options and I'm not going to ignore them because of what you say.

My biology tells me that my sexuality is not hetrosexual. That does not mean i'm hiding behind that and actin like everyone has the same biology, ignoring what is obvious.

Never said you should...

Again, what the hell are you on Jor el? Why does it matter so much to you that gay people follow your idea of biology and becme good little hetroseuals to carry on the species? We're not exactly on the verge of extinction, requiring every individual to 'do their duty' to ensure the survival of the species.

So why?

It is not my idea of biology. It is biology. I simply think it is high time that people admit the truth that it is not a thing to be considered normal. Acceptable sure.. normal? No.

And my biological desire for sex is not the same as yours. And your desires are not the same as anyone elses.

It is, unless you are not human.

Honestly, that sounds like utter nonsense. Ask any parent here and i'm sure they'd prove you wrong but then I guess you'd ignore that because they're not 'wild'.

Once again, you have this bleak, horrible world view. What happened to you to make you this negative?

Sure it does... but its the truth.

What is that old saying, Pessimism is actually realism without the frills, besides, pessimists live longer.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Jor-el

[Jor-el]

There is nothing wrong about wanting to mature and figure out who you are before you have children Jor el. In fact, it is a great idea. The commitment and energy that is devoted to parenting probably should not be taken lightly. Not everyone decides on this path though, it isn't for everyone in spite of their ability to reproduce. If someone decides to make their work their source of fulfillment I do not think they are less then in any way.

To put the kind of thought into having kids that Shadow is-- is a reflection of maturity and wisdom. There is more to some peoples lives then having children.For them, they serve and find meaning in other ways.

For ex: I am good at and enjoy parenting a lot, I think I should pay my kids for the privilege of this journey, it is so fun and the person I have had an opportunity to grow into is because of the experience of my kids, but it isn't' the only aspect of my life that brings meaning. I am very fortunate to be married to my best friend and 17 years into this we are madly in love with each other and we look forward to when it will just be us, we invest a lot of time into nurturing our relationship. I have many other aspects of my life that bring me fulfillment besides my kids, for me I think it would be burdensome to my kids if I limited myself to only being able to be fulfilled because of them, part of being an adult is having my own a sense of self too as it helps cultivate a perspective that is not limited to ego-centrism.

And I am not talking about you but what we can find in most of the western world.

Do you know that there are people who have had so much sex with multiple partners, that they cannot relate to people anymore? And this is a good thing?

Do you know how many career orientated people reach a point in their lives and look around and say, exactly what have I actually accomplished?

No Sheri, the so-called western world is simply digging its own grave with this kind of behavior, ultimately, these people will die alone and they will take nothing with them.

[+Sherapy]

Natural and deviance are two specific words. Homosexuality can be considered natural in that it exists in nature, but it is a genetic deviance from the norm.

No I would not agree, what I perceive you are attempting, is to reconcile the fact that even though we can accept homosexuality in society, we need not accept it is a normal sexual behaviour. It is not. It is in fact a deviance from the norm, not merely a natural variation as so many people try to convince society. It is a fact that people are simply not willing to accept. But it remains a fact all the same.

The fact that it exists in nature does not make it any less deviant.

If I find that 1% of a population is susceptible to a particular illness, it is still a deviance from the norm. Look at the words as they are meant to be used, not what you somehow read into them.

I disagree wholeheartedly, I find that particular rationalization ineffective. The norm is found by function and biology, what contradicts that function and biology may be natural, but it is not the norm.

Please note Sheri that once again you are trying to justify a biological argument with a sociological defense, it ain't good enough.

You are correct Jor el, for me, there is nothing to reconcile the Science states that there are 4 sexual orientations this is not new data it has been taught since 1975.

I do accept homosexuality,bisexuality, heterosexuality, and asexuality as part of the spectrum of normal sexual behavior as long as it is between consensual adults.

I even understand that you won't because of religious reasons, but at this point in our culture it no longer matters, religious ideology has no voice in the matter. On a personal note knock yourself out believing whatever you want, all is fair that ends fair anyways.

Because in the end I say thank god and I mean thank god for Justice, the Constitution, and the Civil Rights Movement.

These voices are getting the last word. Sorry to gloat but I do love seeing fairness and equality win the day.

Thank you for taking the time to reply.

[shadowhive]

Never said you should...

Good.

It is not my idea of biology. It is biology. I simply think it is high time that people admit the truth that it is not a thing to be considered normal. Acceptable sure.. normal? No.

You keep believing that if you like, but it won't happen. You've been presented the truth of the situation many time and every time you've ignored it so I don't think you value truth.

It is, unless you are not human.

Oh I'm human, probably more so than you.

Let's gather together all the straight man and see if you have all the same desires. You'd quickly see desires vary.

Sure it does... but its the truth.

What is that old saying, Pessimism is actually realism without the frills, besides, pessimists live longer.

It'd take a lot for me to have that bleak world view.

[Jor-el]

All you care about is the norm, the majority. Well we are not all identical. We are not like ants, or bees where every individual is identical (bar the queen's of the repective hives) we are a species where variation IS the norm, where everyone one of us is fundementally different. I'm not like you, nor am I like Odin. Or pa. Or rette. Each and every one of us is different, unique, individual.

The 'norm' is an illusion in human terms and utterly meaningly, because everyone is part of a minority in some way or another.

Biological dead ends? Only if all that matters is having a child. Which, it doesn't take much at all to see that that's not the case.

You will come to realize one day that children are what really matter. The rest is useless brouhaha...

And no matter how you try you cannot change the meaning of "norm".

[shadowhive]

You will come to realize one day that children are what really matter. The rest is useless brouhaha...

And no matter how you try you cannot change the meaning of "norm".

No mtter how much yu try you can not ignore baic humanity.

Maybe I will. In which case then i'll try to have a child. That will be my choice to do so. Not your choice. Not the cause of some biological urge.

[+Sherapy]

And I am not talking about you but what we can find in most of the western world.

Do you know that there are people who have had so much sex with multiple partners, that they cannot relate to people anymore? And this is a good thing?

Do you know how many career orientated people reach a point in their lives and look around and say, exactly what have I actually accomplished?

No Sheri, the so-called western world is simply digging its own grave with this kind of behavior, ultimately, these people will die alone and they will take nothing with them.

I am in the Western World and your conclusions are limited. Sure there are those that you describe and those that are doing fine in spite of your perspective.

I am sorry you are having such a hard time reconciling different sexual orientations, and I hope for you eventually it gets easier. Changing ones mind is work and not easy as you show. I'll pray for you.

All the best, Jor el.

[Jor-el]

You are correct Jor el, for me, there is nothing to reconcile the Science states that there are 4 sexual orientations this is not new data it has been taught since 1975.

I do accept homosexuality,bisexuality, heterosexuality, and asexuality as part of the spectrum of normal sexual behavior as long as it is between consensual adults.

I even understand that you won't because of religious reasons, but at this point in our culture it no longer matters, religious ideology has no voice in the matter. On a personal note knock yourself out believing whatever you want, all is fair that ends fair anyways.

Because in the end I say thank god and I mean thank god for Justice, the Constitution, and the Civil Rights Movement.

These voices are getting the last word. Sorry to gloat but I do love seeing fairness and equality win the day.

Thank you for taking the time to reply.

So you believe that my argument stems from a religious perspective? and that that then colours my perception?

Rationalization is part of human nature, your response demonstrates this. You cannot deny the facts, even when you try to change the meaning of words.

[Jor-el]

No mtter how much yu try you can not ignore baic humanity.

Maybe I will. In which case then i'll try to have a child. That will be my choice to do so. Not your choice. Not the cause of some biological urge.

No I can't and I don't want to ignore basic humanity, which is why I accept homosexuality on the basis that these people have the right to love and be loved, but it is amazing how they refuse to accept the truth of biology as it pertains to them.

As for it not being the biological urge doing your rationalizing for you, I'll leave you to convince yourself of whatever you want.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Jor-el

[Mr Right Wing]

Being gay does not make you any less of a man

Of course it does > Immature laughing <

[shadowhive]

No I can't and I don't want to ignore basic humanity, which is why I accept homosexuality on the basis that these people have the right to love and be loved, but it is amazing how they refuse to accept the truth of biology as it pertains to them.

As for it not being the biological urge doing your rationalizing for you, I'll leave you to convince yourself of whatever you want.

It's amazing how you refuse to accept the truth when it comes to them.

So me having a child when I want is bad and I should be, what? Find a female and get her pregnant once a year every year until she's unable?

Of course it does > Immature laughing <

The fifth word says it all: immature.

[Jor-el]

I am in the Western World and your conclusions are limited. Sure there are those that you describe and those that are doing fine in spite of your perspective.

I am sorry you are having such a hard time reconciling different sexual orientations, and I hope for you eventually it gets easier. Changing ones mind is work and not easy as you show. I'll pray for you.

All the best, Jor el.

You'd be amazed at how widespread the situation is, if you really looked.

[Jor-el]

Jor el, if you really want to go down the "what is normal" route. Of the other 8.7 million species on this planet (making us quite the minority...) I don't see any of them forming community recognised unions in their own little churches...I guess, naturally speaking, Christianity's beloved idea of marriage is accepted, yes...but normal? no!

Why I believe someone finally got the message!!!

[+Sherapy]

So you believe that my argument stems from a religious perspective? and that that then colours my perception?

Rationalization is part of human nature, your response demonstrates this. You cannot deny the facts, even when you try to change the meaning of words.

It seems you are having a hard time, as I said whatever the reasons changing a mind is not easy for some and some never do, that may include you, so be it --it really doesn't matter now because the Gay community is well on it's way to being treated in equality. The voices that disagree hold no weight, the majority has spoken. I am proud to be part of that majority.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Sherapy