I think it is possible that my development could have gone to bad track.
Respectfully, I think this comes to my original point. For some people they can find other people of the same sex attractive that way, as well as those of the opposite sex. As I said, human sexuality is along a spectrum, not hard clean divisions the way we like to categorize things as this or as that. So for those who can relate to those feelings of same-sex attraction more than others, but are given a powerful negative message from their community that those are "bad" or evil, or sin, etc., then they may very well repress those feelings as "wrong" in themselves.
Then the unfortunate thing is, the message they tell themselves internally, is that there is something wrong with them, that they are bad people, and they are in conflict with themselves emotionally and psychologically, which then directly affects their spiritual wellbeing.
Everyone does this to themselves in one area of life or another, such as being a male and not living up to this cultural ideal of being a he-man, the rugged individualist, the successful climber in business, the ideal husband who provides for his family financially while his wife stays at home to raise the kids. All these ideals of who society or culture tells us we "should" and "shouldn't" be, put us into conflict with the reality of who we really know who we are, at a subconscious level. This role-conformity expectation was especially pronounced for me in my years in the fundamentalist Christian culture, but even aside from that, mainstream culture itself does plenty of that itself.
So, as I've said, when someone does this to something like their sexual self-identity, "I must suppress this evil inside me", calling it evil because of other's judgments (not their own), then that conflict can often result in projecting onto others that demon in themselves, and gay-bash, and the like in order to do battle with their own repressed tendencies they want to kill. Repression can be in fact, far more unhealthy for someone, then any fear of health issues from homosexuality.
None of this is to say or suggest someone explore their homosexual interests in order to "let that self-created 'demon' out to play," to relieve that pressure. But I would say simple self-acceptance of who and what they are, and dropping the whole anti-gay thing, would be enough for them to become more loving and at peace with themselves and others. I know for myself, in different unrelated areas of my life, letting go of that self-hatred is the key to loving others.
But I don't think there is some simple way to raise person to be for example homosexual. It depends much on what kind of person is and if you know the personality well enough, then it is possible to manipulate person.
I would say someone could manipulate someone into having gay sex, if they aren't gay, but that isn't going to make them homosexuals. It's not going to stick. It's not going to become what they now want all the time, if that is not who they are.
I know of those who experimented with other boys growing up as they discovered sex. And that would be more a matter of just having access to unthreatening sex between "friends", rather than navigating the emotional terrain of boy-girl relationships at that level at an early age. But them doing that as an experiment is not going to make them homosexuals, or mean that they are homosexual, if they actually aren't.
I don't think any sexuality defines a person.
I would say that one's sexual identity, very much is part of one's own self identity. For instance, as a hetrosexual male, I may choose to not have sex with anyone at all, because I prefer to direct my energies and attentions elsewhere. But I still know that I am a hetrosexual male, whether I act upon that or not. It is part of my self-identity.
Same thing with gays. Same thing with bi-sexuals. A bi-sexual may choose to never pursue same-sex relationships for similar reasons. Too complex. Too socially risky, etc. But they are still bi-sexual people, and that is what they know about themselves to be true. It is part of their own self-identity.
The problems begin when we deny ourselves to ourselves, break that part of ourselves off and deny it or even hate it. Then we create problems for ourselves, emotionally, psychological, socially, and spiritually. One does not need to display these things to others, but we do need to be honest with ourselves at least. God knows the truth of us, and loves us unconditionally. We need to learn how to do that too. That's the key to loving others unconditionally as well.
They are humans, and in all humans forcing someone to do something, or not to do something is not in my opinion good.
We are in agreement. Love is always invitational, never forces itself. The 13th chapter of 1 Corinthians speaks the truth of the nature of Love.
And about hell, Bible says that eternal life is for righteous, and the others go to hell. That is just how it is.
I don't have a problem understanding hell as a real state of being. I very much believe that the descriptions of hell as a "place" is a metaphor for something real in ourselves as well live our lives in darkness separated from its true Source, which is Light. Hell is an experience of living life in darkness, as opposed to living life in the LIght. It's a way of being, a condition of being, a lived experience. And that is real.
I think it's more productive to think of heaven and hell, in terms of this life. Not places you go to after this life.
Telling that is basically the same as saying, if you put your hand in fire, it will burn. Saying, don't worry, you can place your hand in fire without consequences would be lying and harmful for the other person.
But you must be careful that what you think is sin for someone else, is not sin to them. That's why I make such an emphasis for Christians to spend some earnest time reading Paul's admonishment to them in Romans 14. He spent an entire chapter going over this. And yet, so few Christians I know understand the importance of that, or take it to heart. I believe that is because they simply "don't get it", yet.
It's more about using body in some way that can be harmful/unhealthy. In Biblical point of view, it is:
If a man lies with a male, as with a woman...
Lev. 20:13
The only thing I read as harmful or unhealthy there, is the threat against those who do that by others who would inflict that harm upon them. Aside from ancient laws that prohibited that activity under the threat of capital punishment, what actually is harmful or unhealthy in the act of homosexuality itself? STD's? Well, don't have promiscuous sex then. Remain monogamous, or have protected sex.
Now regarding what you quoted from Leviticus, I'd like to say a few words. I know that there are certain groups of Christians, fundamentalists in particular, who treat the OT law as of equal voice and importance as the NT teachings. But if that were true, then why did Christ have to come? Just follow the OT, and be done with it. Paul wrote at length in Hebrews (or whoever the author actually was), about that very point.
There are those Christians, which I can more easily identify with, who see Jesus as superseding the OT law. The book of Leviticus does not have an equal voice to Jesus. In fact, Jesus actually directly cites Leviticus and teaches a "better way", than what Moses taught. He had that authority.
"You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also."
So if you want to follow Jesus, then follow Jesus. Not Moses. Jesus overrode Moses and the more privative, brutal form of social structures, such as cutting off someone's hands, knocking their teeth out, gouging their eyes out, crushing them to death for having sex with another man, and so forth. "But I say unto you...", Jesus said.
So for Christians, the popular saying of "What would Jesus do", has far more importance to us today, then "What would Moses do". Jesus taught a "better way", then the brutality of old ways.
And beside that, as Paul said, if you are going to say you need to follow the law, then you need to actually do that. Not just quote Leviticus when it serves to reject homosexuals. Eating shellfish is also called an abomination. But are there fundamentalist Christians protesting Red Lobster restaurants? Hell, no. Their sitting in them eating lobsters and crabs, while quoting Leviticus how gays are sinners!
You get my point here?
However, this obviously depends much on persons reasonability. For example, we may think that eating through ear is not reasonable, because it is not healthy and doesn't work, but someone else may think it is not stupid.
Regarding your analogy of eating through the ear. Of course that is not reasonable. You will never be able to satisfy your hunger craving through that orifice. However, you can satisfy your sexual cravings using other parts of your body, such as hands or the mouth, or.... use your imagination. You can be sexual fulfilled, having sex other ways besides penetration. So since you can't get food to your stomach through the ear canal, but you can have sex successfully using other parts of the body, your analogy doesn't work.
