Is sexuality a choice?

[Dan Mellis]

I'm interested to hear the views of those who think sexuality is a choice - specifically in response to these questions...

1: did you choose to be heterosexual?

2: could you choose to be homosexual? Remember, just choosing to have gay sex doesn't make you gay. You have to be attracted to the same sex. That's kind of how it works.

If you answered no to either of these, then sexuality isn't a choice. If sexuality isn't a choice, then in what world can anyone be justified in sending gay people to hell?

Another part of this topic is the whole HIV/Aids thing as a punishment. Why would an all powerful god create a pubishment for a specific group of people, that also harmed people outside of that group? Also, why would he bother? Surely he could just send em to hell when they're done, what difference does it make?

To me, its obvious that either God doesn't exist or he's a raging hateful buffoon... Imagine Hitler, but with an IQ of about 31.

 

[Samana Johann]

Oh you poor sex-slaves... forced by evil. Is this question really serious?

 

[Dan Mellis]

Oh you poor sex-slaves... forced by evil. Is this question really serious?

What?

Are you forced to be a human? Yet you don't have a choice, do you?

You've smuggled in the word 'evil' there. Homosexuality isn't evil. If you wanted to claim that position, you'd have to prove it I'm afraid.

 

[Samana Johann]

What?

Nothing arises for one without having given into certain choices. So good to make wise or ask of what is good to do, good to abound, for long time happiness and liberation from all debtsdebts, householder.

 

[Estro Felino]

1: did you choose to be heterosexual?
No. I am a female attracted to males only.
I didn't choose it. I think males' mind is the most complicated thing on Earth...so I didn't choose to be attracted to the male body.

2: could you choose to be homosexual?
Absolutely not. I like females' mind but I am not attracted to the female body. The mere idea of kissing a woman...the mere idea of female saliva makes me puke.
It depends on the olfaction/tastes which are the senses of sex.

 

[Dan Mellis]

Nothing arises for one without having given into certain choices. So good to make wise or ask of what is good to do, good to abound, for long time happiness and liberation from all debtsdebts, householder.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure if theres a language barrier here but I'm not following.

 

[Dan Mellis]

1: did you choose to be heterosexual?
No. I am a female attracted to males only.
I didn't choose it. I think males' mind is the most complicated thing on Earth...so I didn't choose to be attracted to the male body.

2: could you choose to be homosexual?
Absolutely not. I like females' mind but I am not attracted to the female body. The mere idea of kissing a woman...the mere idea of female saliva makes me puke.
It depends on the olfaction/tastes which are the senses of sex.

Cool, so... You don't think it's a choice? If not then fantastic

 

[Dan Mellis]

Nothing arises for one without having given into certain choices. So good to make wise or ask of what is good to do, good to abound, for long time happiness and liberation from all debtsdebts, householder.

Are you saying that sexuality is a choice? If so, please reread the post and answer the questions within.

 

[Nimos]

I'm interested to hear the views of those who think sexuality is a choice - specifically in response to these questions...

1: did you choose to be heterosexual?

2: could you choose to be homosexual? Remember, just choosing to have gay sex doesn't make you gay. You have to be attracted to the same sex. That's kind of how it works.

If you answered no to either of these, then sexuality isn't a choice. If sexuality isn't a choice, then in what world can anyone be justified in sending gay people to hell?

Another part of this topic is the whole HIV/Aids thing as a punishment. Why would an all powerful god create a pubishment for a specific group of people, that also harmed people outside of that group? Also, why would he bother? Surely he could just send em to hell when they're done, what difference does it make?

To me, its obvious that either God doesn't exist or he's a raging hateful buffoon... Imagine Hitler, but with an IQ of about 31.

As far as I know there is a dispute about this as neither, from what I know is proven to be correct. Personally I think its a mixture of nature and nurture. But then again im not an expert on the topic.

Regarding sending gays to hell, I think is only explained by the biblical/jewish God being invented by man and probably have its root in something with how a man were to be perceived in that period of time, as a dominant figure or person in control of the family. This is obviously not something that im 100% sure of, but from the view of the ancient Jews, a being "taken" by another as if he were a women meaning, taking the place or role as if he were women, would have been seen as weak. One have to remember that women in biblical times were not seen as mens equals, but some under the control of the man. Which is all supported by the scriptures. So my guess is that they probably saw gays sex as being something against the will of God and therefore they should be killed. Them getting thrown in hell, is not something that is said in the bible, but an assumption that this is where they will end up, depending on whether one believe in hell or not.

Also you have to remember that the Romans had quite a open sex live, but at the same time saw little issues with same sex relationships as long as it didn't ruined the "dominated" males position. Which would again be to be on the receiving end as far as I understand it. So my guess is that people in ancient times were a lot less concerned about all this than later in history, but that this tendency to look at homosexuals as different probably varied from country to country and were probably less accepted in Jewish communities than else were.

Another part of this topic is the whole HIV/Aids thing as a punishment. Why would an all powerful god create a pubishment for a specific group of people, that also harmed people outside of that group? Also, why would he bother? Surely he could just send em to hell when they're done, what difference does it make?

Not 100% sure what you mean here, do you mean the old statement that some people made that HIV/AIDS only affected homosexuals and therefore its a punishment or what? These hit all people, so clearly such statement is wrong and not a punishment of any kind. And again the explanation is that God is man made, because there is no logical reason for HIV/AIDS regardless of sexuality. I doubt any religious person can give you a satisfying explanation and that the closest you will get to one is that God works in mysteries ways, which is equal to saying, I have no clue.

To me, its obvious that either God doesn't exist or he's a raging hateful buffoon... Imagine Hitler, but with an IQ of about 31.

That is also the only two options I see.

 

[Polymath257]

For myself, there was not a choice: I am attracted to women and not to men. It really is just that simple.

That said, attraction is a complicated thing. When you first meet someone, there can be an initial attraction, but I have to *choose* to allow that to grow or to allow it to wither. I can encourage it or discourage it. But there has to be that initial attraction before I can make that choice. If I am not attracted initially, it is much, much less likely that I will end up being attracted later.

Next, I am sure there are people for whom attraction is more of a choice. Given the wide variety in human sexuality, I would be surprised if *nobody* has a choice. But I also don't see it as common.

 

[pearl]

If you answered no to either of these, then sexuality isn't a choice.

Sexuality is not a choice. The sexual act is a choice.

 

[Dan Mellis]

As far as I know there is a dispute about this as neither, from what I know is proven to be correct. Personally I think its a mixture of nature and nurture. But then again im not an expert on the topic.

Regarding sending gays to hell, I think is only explained by the biblical/jewish God being invented by man and probably have its root in something with how a man were to be perceived in that period of time, as a dominant figure or person in control of the family. This is obviously not something that im 100% sure of, but from the view of the ancient Jews, a being "taken" by another as if he were a women meaning, taking the place or role as if he were women, would have been seen as weak. One have to remember that women in biblical times were not seen as mens equals, but some under the control of the man. Which is all supported by the scriptures. So my guess is that they probably saw gays sex as being something against the will of God and therefore they should be killed. Them getting thrown in hell, is not something that is said in the bible, but an assumption that this is where they will end up, depending on whether one believe in hell or not.

Also you have to remember that the Romans had quite a open sex live, but at the same time saw little issues with same sex relationships as long as it didn't ruined the "dominated" males position. Which would again be to be on the receiving end as far as I understand it. So my guess is that people in ancient times were a lot less concerned about all this than later in history, but that this tendency to look at homosexuals as different probably varied from country to country and were probably less accepted in Jewish communities than else were.


Not 100% sure what you mean here, do you mean the old statement that some people made that HIV/AIDS only affected homosexuals and therefore its a punishment or what? These hit all people, so clearly such statement is wrong and not a punishment of any kind. And again the explanation is that God is man made, because there is no logical reason for HIV/AIDS regardless of sexuality. I doubt any religious person can give you a satisfying explanation and that the closest you will get to one is that God works in mysteries ways, which is equal to saying, I have no clue.


That is also the only two options I see.

I agree with all of the above haha. I meant to make the point that AIDS etc is obviously not some sort of punishment. Or at least, if it is, then whatever is responsible is simultaneously woefully inept and entirely contemptible.

 

[Dan Mellis]

For myself, there was not a choice: I am attracted to women and not to men. It really is just that simple.

That said, attraction is a complicated thing. When you first meet someone, there can be an initial attraction, but I have to *choose* to allow that to grow or to allow it to wither. I can encourage it or discourage it. But there has to be that initial attraction before I can make that choice. If I am not attracted initially, it is much, much less likely that I will end up being attracted later.

Next, I am sure there are people for whom attraction is more of a choice. Given the wide variety in human sexuality, I would be surprised if *nobody* has a choice. But I also don't see it as common.

Well, allowing that attraction to grow would be a choice, but that doesn't speak to sexuality. I'm not sure I agree with the final statement though. I don't necessarily disagree, but in my experience people tend not to choose who they're attracted to.

 

[Dan Mellis]

Sexuality is not a choice. The sexual act is a choice.

Yes. And people should be allowed to act upon their sexuality provided it doesn't harm the other party. I don't know your religious position but going from what you've said I assume you're opposed to homosexual activity?

 

[Polymath257]

Well, allowing that attraction to grow would be a choice, but that doesn't speak to sexuality. I'm not sure I agree with the final statement though. I don't necessarily disagree, but in my experience people tend not to choose who they're attracted to.

I agree it isn't common. But given the wide range of human sexual response, I would be surprised if there aren't people who can choose. maybe they aren't very attracted to *anyone* initially, but can choose to make it happen.

I also think that our sexuality may change over time. As I age, the 'charge' of sexuality has shifted and I can see how that could shift preferences. Again, I don't know how common that is, but I suspect there is more flexibility over time than many think.

 

[pearl]

That is also the only two options I see.

Those who wrote knew nothing of sexual orientation, only the act carried out in idolatry or in Lev those who were assaulted etc.

 

[Cooky]

I'm interested to hear the views of those who think sexuality is a choice - specifically in response to these questions...

1: did you choose to be heterosexual?

2: could you choose to be homosexual? Remember, just choosing to have gay sex doesn't make you gay. You have to be attracted to the same sex. That's kind of how it works.

If you answered no to either of these, then sexuality isn't a choice. If sexuality isn't a choice, then in what world can anyone be justified in sending gay people to hell?

Another part of this topic is the whole HIV/Aids thing as a punishment. Why would an all powerful god create a pubishment for a specific group of people, that also harmed people outside of that group? Also, why would he bother? Surely he could just send em to hell when they're done, what difference does it make?

To me, its obvious that either God doesn't exist or he's a raging hateful buffoon... Imagine Hitler, but with an IQ of about 31.

Yes, sexuality can be a choice for hundreds of millions of people.

Also to say that God either doesn't exist, or he is a hateful buffoon based on AIDS, is itself an ignorant comment, since God does not give gay people AIDS.

I like to think, that free will is in a way extended to all life, including plants and viruses. Every living thing is free to do what it will to stay alive.

 

[pearl]

Yes. And people should be allowed to act upon their sexuality provided it doesn't harm the other party. I don't know your religious position but going from what you've said I assume you're opposed to homosexual activity?

Unless one is raped or otherwise coerced, to engage in sex is a choice. As for religion I'll go with Pope Francis, 'who am I to judge'?

 

[Dan Mellis]

I agree it isn't common. But given the wide range of human sexual response, I would be surprised if there aren't people who can choose. maybe they aren't very attracted to *anyone* initially, but can choose to make it happen.

I also think that our sexuality may change over time. As I age, the 'charge' of sexuality has shifted and I can see how that could shift preferences. Again, I don't know how common that is, but I suspect there is more flexibility over time than many think.

I can see how that might happen.

I agree about the flexibility thing. I think everyone is on the spectrum somewhere - many aren't that way enough to want to try anything and that's fine, I'm not suggesting anyone is just in the closet or whatever. I'd probably question how much societal values affect things though. Like, if someone thought they were shifting preferences, I wonder how much of that would be affected by societal pressure also shifting?

 

[Dan Mellis]

Unless one is raped or otherwise coerced, to engage in sex is a choice. As for religion I'll go with Pope Francis, 'who am I to judge'?

If only everyone were as tolerant