The Problem with "Fighting" Homosexuality

[dgirl1986]

There are always a heavy supply of threads on religious type forums regarding homosexuality especially when debating the fact that it is wrong or against wrong or whatever.

What I notice the most in these discussions and debates is when outspoken conservative christians come out with what they call the truth about homosexuality, they are quite hateful towards the sexuality. This could be understandable if it ended there but it doesnt. There seems to be this irrational fear or hate towards the person with the sexuality. Is this what it means to follow jesus?

In my opinon, if these people truly cared about us and saw us as equal human beings they would do the obligatory mention that it is a sin and we may burn or whatever but it would end there. They wouldnt then disown, humiliate, embarass, bash, harass etc said person.

 

[1137]

I'm not sure what exactly you're looking for in a debate here. The ironic thing about homosexuality, in my opinion, is that is is "unnatural" - as religion claims - to an extent. Homosexuality can almost be seen as a natural defect, similar to lactose intolerance or depression which, from a natural selection view, are completely wrong. The irony here should be obvious! To make this argument you have to accept evolution.

Anyways, we don't let depressed people (like me for instance!) just kill themselves, there are ways to help. We don't let disabled people fend for themselves, or paralyzed individuals crawl around. All these would be "unnatural" to continue in accordance with evolution. Suicide leads to no reproduction, homosexuality leads to no reproduction, paralisys would lead to starvation and death. The thing is, in our modern world, these "defects" aren't cause for concern.

 

[Uberpod]

homosexuality leads to no reproduction

False!

 

[dgirl1986]

The ironic thing about homosexuality, in my opinion, is that is is "unnatural" - as religion claims - to an extent. Homosexuality can almost be seen as a natural defect, similar to lactose intolerance or depression which, from a natural selection view, are completely wrong. The irony here should be obvious! To make this argument you have to accept evolution.

Anyways, we don't let depressed people (like me for instance!) just kill themselves, there are ways to help. We don't let disabled people fend for themselves, or paralyzed individuals crawl around. All these would be "unnatural" to continue in accordance with evolution. Suicide leads to no reproduction, homosexuality leads to no reproduction, paralisys would lead to starvation and death. The thing is, in our modern world, these "defects" aren't cause for concern.

I do not think you can label it a defect until the origin of it can be properly understood. It has not been proved to be some sort of defect. Your comparison of homosexuality with depression, lactose intolerance and disability is absurd. Those things you listed are things that cause harm to the individual without outside interference.

Homosexuals only encounter harm when it is inflicted by others. We are by no means disabled and are still able to parent children. Having said that, not everything has to be about reproduction. In fact I think people might want to ease up on how many children they have.

 

[Ingledsva]

I'm not sure what exactly you're looking for in a debate here. The ironic thing about homosexuality, in my opinion, is that is is "unnatural" - as religion claims - to an extent. Homosexuality can almost be seen as a natural defect, similar to lactose intolerance or depression which, from a natural selection view, are completely wrong. The irony here should be obvious! To make this argument you have to accept evolution.

Anyways, we don't let depressed people (like me for instance!) just kill themselves, there are ways to help. We don't let disabled people fend for themselves, or paralyzed individuals crawl around. All these would be "unnatural" to continue in accordance with evolution. Suicide leads to no reproduction, homosexuality leads to no reproduction, paralisys would lead to starvation and death. The thing is, in our modern world, these "defects" aren't cause for concern.

There are studies out there pointing to homosexuality possibly being the result of a gene that actually HELPS women have more children.

And another that shows homosexual births go up after disasters. This makes sense in the Evolutionary need to survive. Their births mean more workers to rebuild the destroyed society, while producing no extra children that would have to be fed, clothed, housed, etc. Evolution at work. Forgot to add they would also be able to take in and raise the children of the dead, which heterosexuals with their own kids to feed - would be less likely to do.

I'm getting tired of gay people being called unnatural, or a defect, etc.

*

 

[Uberpod]

Homosexuals have healthy reproductive systems.

 

[nazz]

There seems to be this irrational fear or hate towards the person with the sexuality. Is this what it means to follow jesus?

Unequivocally NO

 

[psychoslice]

It could be that those who really hate, are themselves that way incline, when we suppress something it is then projected onto the very thing we are trying to suppress. Most religious people don't worry about it, its just that hand full of suppresses that have the problem.

 

[Ingledsva]

Homosexuals have healthy reproductive systems.

Yep, but obviously they prefer same sex partners.

*

 

[Uberpod]

Yep, but obviously they prefer same sex partners.

*

If they want biological children, they will have them.

 

[dgirl1986]

There are studies out there pointing to homosexuality possibly being the result of a gene that actually HELPS women have more children.

And another that shows homosexual births go up after disasters. This makes sense in the Evolutionary need to survive. There births mean more workers to rebuild the destroyed society, while producing no extra children that would have to be fed, clothed, housed, etc. Evolution at work. Forgot to add they would also be able to take in and raise the children of the dead, which heterosexuals with their own kids to feed - would be less likely to do.

I'm getting tired of gay people being called unnatural, or a defect, etc.

*

Wow that is really fascinating!

Trust me, we are tired of it too.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Different phase at RF. Different target.

Never fear. This will pass, and the hateful folks will move on to the next group of people they think are subhuman.

I'm sorry to sound trite. But most of the time, it's the same people.

 

[dgirl1986]

Different phase at RF. Different target.

Never fear. This will pass, and the hateful folks will move on to the next group of people they think are subhuman.

I'm sorry to sound trite. But most of the time, it's the same people.

Its been a recurring theme on this and other forums for some time now.

 

[ChristineES]

The same can be said about fighting anything at all. For instance, calling theists delusional makes we theists feel as though that those who say it think we are not worthy human beings, too. Not that I care if they think I am worthy or not, however. We all have feelings. So I can sympathize.

 

[Nietzsche]

There will come a time, not unlike the emancipation of black Americans, where the children of those who shunned homosexuals, transexuals, so on and so forth will be rightfully ashamed for the actions of their forefathers.

We're approaching that time. And because of that, those who hold hardest to the old, broken and immoral ways fight harder and harder. Their movement is drowning, they know it on some level, and this is a fear response from it.

I just hope it lingers long enough to forever tarnish their memory. Sometimes we need a painful reminder of how horrible we used to be. So please, let the hate flow through. I'll be busy writing its death certificate.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Different phase at RF. Different target.

Never fear. This will pass, and the hateful folks will move on to the next group of people they think are subhuman.

I'm sorry to sound trite. But most of the time, it's the same people.

Yeah, but the important thing is they get to feel special by dehumanizing those around them.

 

[dgirl1986]

The same can be said about fighting anything at all. For instance, calling theists delusional makes we theists feel as though that those who say it think we are not worthy human beings, too. Not that I care if they think I am worthy or not, however. We all have feelings. So I can sympathize.

I am glad to say that I have never said such a thing

 

[lewisnotmiller]

The same can be said about fighting anything at all. For instance, calling theists delusional makes we theists feel as though that those who say it think we are not worthy human beings, too. Not that I care if they think I am worthy or not, however. We all have feelings. So I can sympathize.

Delusional theists ARE delusional. It's just that too many people leave the first 'delusional' off, and just extrapolate it to all theists.
Same thing happens with atheists being arrogant/angry. Or poor people being thieves. Or any other group labouring under stereotypes.

But gay folk are gay. All of 'em. There is no stereotyping in terms of group identification. Instead, most people who have issues with gay folks seem to come from a religious standpoint (ie. my religion says it's wrong) or from a gay sex is icky standpoint.
So trying to combat that in terms of breaking down stereotypes seems somewhat less effective that proving theists aren't all delusional, or atheists aren't all arrogant. Either it's scriptual/religious argument (and why should that matter for a gay person of a different religion) or it's trying to prove gay sex isn't icky.

Either way, it seems a slightly different proposition to stereotyping a group based on the acts of a few, to my mind.

 

[ChristineES]

Delusional theists ARE delusional. It's just that too many people leave the first 'delusional' off, and just extrapolate it to all theists.
Same thing happens with atheists being arrogant/angry. Or poor people being thieves. Or any other group labouring under stereotypes.

But gay folk are gay. All of 'em. There is no stereotyping in terms of group identification. Instead, most people who have issues with gay folks seem to come from a religious standpoint (ie. my religion says it's wrong) or from a gay sex is icky standpoint.
So trying to combat that in terms of breaking down stereotypes seems somewhat less effective that proving theists aren't all delusional, or atheists aren't all arrogant. Either it's scriptual/religious argument (and why should that matter for a gay person of a different religion) or it's trying to prove gay sex isn't icky.

Either way, it seems a slightly different proposition to stereotyping a group based on the acts of a few, to my mind.

I don't appreciate being called delusional. I didn't like it when someone called me the "s-word"(racial slur for Hispanics), either. Do you think it's any different to stereotype theists than it is to stereotype gays or different races? I think it's wrong to stereotype, to judge, to condemn, etc. no matter what. I don't separate people. People are who they are. Whether they are gay, straight, religious, atheist, no matter what ethnic group they might be.

People should be defined by their character: Not by their sexual orientation, race or ethnic group, religion, culture, nationality.

 

[Nietzsche]

I don't appreciate being called delusional.

Neither do actual delusional people.

I'm not saying you are, at all. I'm just saying that's not a very solid argument.

 

[ChristineES]

Neither do actual delusional people.

I'm not saying you are, at all. I'm just saying that's not a very solid argument.

Possibly not. But calling someone you don't even know delusional (as on this forum, you know no one personally) can be seen as rather rude.