-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why is being gay considered wrong?
- Thread starter Ori
- Start date
It is a deviation from the Lord's plan, and condemned in the Bible.
Draka
Wonder Woman
Everything about our body is determined in the brain. We are "hard-wired" a certain way. Love and sexuality is in the brain. For example:
The majority of people are born right handed, this being because there is a certain part of the brain on the left side (which control the right side of the body) that determines dominance. If for some reason the part of the left side of the brain stops forming before dominance is determined then another part of the brain on the right side picks up the trait of dominance and thus you have left handedness. The parts of the brain form at different rates while in the womb and this accounts for the differences. Sometimes parts of the brain stop forming during the formation of traits and the formation is continued elsewhere and hence we have ambidextrousness.
Now look at this in the view of sexuality. Sexuality is determined in the brain as well. Therefore if the part that determines heterosexuality stops forming before that is determined then another part of the brain picks up sexuality and results in a different sexual orientation. Making homosexuality just as normal as left-handedness, which is also why the basic percentage of the population that is left-handed is about the same as homosexual...because things like that happen to only a certain percentage of people. It is a normal thing that happens during brain formation in the womb.
Along those lines then, if you believe that "God" made you the way you are supposed to be, then "God" made gays.
The majority of people are born right handed, this being because there is a certain part of the brain on the left side (which control the right side of the body) that determines dominance. If for some reason the part of the left side of the brain stops forming before dominance is determined then another part of the brain on the right side picks up the trait of dominance and thus you have left handedness. The parts of the brain form at different rates while in the womb and this accounts for the differences. Sometimes parts of the brain stop forming during the formation of traits and the formation is continued elsewhere and hence we have ambidextrousness.
Now look at this in the view of sexuality. Sexuality is determined in the brain as well. Therefore if the part that determines heterosexuality stops forming before that is determined then another part of the brain picks up sexuality and results in a different sexual orientation. Making homosexuality just as normal as left-handedness, which is also why the basic percentage of the population that is left-handed is about the same as homosexual...because things like that happen to only a certain percentage of people. It is a normal thing that happens during brain formation in the womb.
Along those lines then, if you believe that "God" made you the way you are supposed to be, then "God" made gays.
No they are not.
I am not saying it is choice, because I believe that it is caused your circumstances, raising, and experiences
Draka
Wonder Woman
Yes they are. While there are those that may have been so traumatized by some childhood molestion or rape that they may psychologically not be able to be with the same sex anymore, the most of homosexuals are RAISED by heterosexual parents, in the same CIRCUMSTANCES as heterosexual children, and have the same EXPERIENCES as heterosexuals.Mister Emu said:
No one is raised the same way, in the same circumstances, with the same experiences and they take things in differently as well.
Draka
Wonder Woman
So you are saying that it is impossible that two children that ARE raised the same way, perhaps siblings, that DO take in things the same way through experiances and circumstances, for one to be gay and the other straight? I think you still have a lot to learn about biology and psychology Mister Emu.Mister Emu said:
Draka
Wonder Woman
I think that the views expressed by Mister Emu are a great example, however, why some view it to be "wrong." This attitude is expressly the reason why there are so many oppositions about homosexuality. And notice please that the main ones with objections to homosexuality are religion driven.
I don't think it is possible for two people, even twins, to have the exact same experiences, and tot ake those experiences in the same way, so this is a moot question.
Draka
Wonder Woman
So in your mind and your opinion...just what exactly are the experiences that may "cause" homosexuality? And how must those experiences be taken to "cause" it as well? You make no sense. You base your opinion of homosexuality on religious ideas...I base mine on scientific biology, psychology and fact. Please explain your thoughts.Mister Emu said:
jewscout
Religious Zionist
In the Torah there is a prohibition against the act of homosexual sex
and then you get into the definition of what is or isn't "sex"
and lesbianism is just one humongous grey area:banghead3
arggg it's enough to drive a man to sniffin' glue again
the act is a no-no...
does this make a homosexual a bad person? no
are they going to everlasting hellfire and damnation? no
should this deny them the same rights as anyone else? no
and then you get into the definition of what is or isn't "sex"
and lesbianism is just one humongous grey area:banghead3
arggg it's enough to drive a man to sniffin' glue again
the act is a no-no...
does this make a homosexual a bad person? no
are they going to everlasting hellfire and damnation? no
should this deny them the same rights as anyone else? no
I am sorry; until there is scientific evidence to explain why people are gay, I cannot make any judgement. I find it hard to believe that is just 'an emotional choice of sexuality'. It makes no logical sense. Obviously to delve in the possible 'reasons' for one person being gay, as opposed to heterosexual is not for discussion on this thread. But this article below shows that there is a belief that it is more than a 'conscious choice'.
As I said, how can we heterosexuals possibly pass judgement on something we do not understand ?
Latest Gay Brain Study Scrutinized
The mainstream media is reporting on the latest research that purports to show that gay males and heterosexual males respond differently to certain pheromones.
May 11, 2005 - The New York Times has just reported on findings from Swedish researchers who claim to have found that gay males are attracted to a different kind of scent than heterosexual males.
"For Gay Men, an Attraction to a Different Kind of Scent," by Nicolas Wade (5/10/05) quotes Swedish researchers with the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm who have studied pheromones and the different ways women, gay males and heterosexual males react to them.
Lead researcher Dr. Ivanka Savic studied a testosterone derivative produced in men's sweat and an estrogen-like compound in women's urine. Both of these have been suspected of being pheromones.
Savic and her associates found that that gay males responded to these pheromones in the same way women respond. Heterosexual males responded differently.
This study is being reported in the mainstream press as more evidence for a biological basis for homosexual behavior. However, Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, a lecturer in Civil Liberties and Constitutional Law at Princeton University disagrees. According to Dr. Satinover*:
As I said, how can we heterosexuals possibly pass judgement on something we do not understand ?
Latest Gay Brain Study Scrutinized
The mainstream media is reporting on the latest research that purports to show that gay males and heterosexual males respond differently to certain pheromones.
May 11, 2005 - The New York Times has just reported on findings from Swedish researchers who claim to have found that gay males are attracted to a different kind of scent than heterosexual males.
"For Gay Men, an Attraction to a Different Kind of Scent," by Nicolas Wade (5/10/05) quotes Swedish researchers with the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm who have studied pheromones and the different ways women, gay males and heterosexual males react to them.
Lead researcher Dr. Ivanka Savic studied a testosterone derivative produced in men's sweat and an estrogen-like compound in women's urine. Both of these have been suspected of being pheromones.
Savic and her associates found that that gay males responded to these pheromones in the same way women respond. Heterosexual males responded differently.
This study is being reported in the mainstream press as more evidence for a biological basis for homosexual behavior. However, Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, a lecturer in Civil Liberties and Constitutional Law at Princeton University disagrees. According to Dr. Satinover*:
The key statement in the New York Times interview with one of the authors of the article is this:
"We cannot tell if the different pattern is cause or effect," Dr. Savic said. "The study does not give any answer to these crucial questions."
The same discussion arose after LeVay's study and he finally conceded--years later--that repetition of homosexual activity can change the brain to produce the effects he discovered--likewise here as the researchers state directly.
This study says nothing about homosexuality being innate (whether on a direct genetic or indirect, epigenetic hormonal-developmental basis). Likewise, if one changes the state of one's sexuality. The pheromone response would presumably change in consequence of behavioral-induced alterations in the underlying hypothalamic structures.
Because it is tacit and not explicit, the widely-held and erroneous presumption that brain structures are fixed and unresponsive to experience generates a second presumption, also tacit: That if a brain structure or function can be correlated to a behavioral trait then the trait must be both unchangeable and innate. Unaddressed and left non-explicit, this two-step sequence of tacit presumptions attached to explicit, high quality scientific data but of only a correlative kind, almost invariably generates in the mind of the scientifically unsophisticated something akin to a "belief."
Every single study that has emerged since the original LeVay study that falls into the above class--looking for or finding bimodal statistical physiological correlates (nervous system or otherwise) to homosexual versus heterosexual populations, in both males and females, however defined--comes with the same essential caveat: That cause and effect cannot be distinguished by the study.
Yet the press invariably editorializes, by implication or openly, that each new study somehow builds upon the last; that there exists a slowly but surely growing literature supporting the case that "homosexuality is biological," that "homosexuality is innate," "...genetic," "...unchangeable." Nothing could be further from the truth. It would be identically and oppositely tendentious to say that "yet another study fails to find a biological, genetic, innate basis for homosexuality."
Dr. Warren Throckmorton has also examined this latest study and draws the following conclusions: "We cannot tell if the different pattern is cause or effect," Dr. Savic said. "The study does not give any answer to these crucial questions."
The same discussion arose after LeVay's study and he finally conceded--years later--that repetition of homosexual activity can change the brain to produce the effects he discovered--likewise here as the researchers state directly.
This study says nothing about homosexuality being innate (whether on a direct genetic or indirect, epigenetic hormonal-developmental basis). Likewise, if one changes the state of one's sexuality. The pheromone response would presumably change in consequence of behavioral-induced alterations in the underlying hypothalamic structures.
Because it is tacit and not explicit, the widely-held and erroneous presumption that brain structures are fixed and unresponsive to experience generates a second presumption, also tacit: That if a brain structure or function can be correlated to a behavioral trait then the trait must be both unchangeable and innate. Unaddressed and left non-explicit, this two-step sequence of tacit presumptions attached to explicit, high quality scientific data but of only a correlative kind, almost invariably generates in the mind of the scientifically unsophisticated something akin to a "belief."
Every single study that has emerged since the original LeVay study that falls into the above class--looking for or finding bimodal statistical physiological correlates (nervous system or otherwise) to homosexual versus heterosexual populations, in both males and females, however defined--comes with the same essential caveat: That cause and effect cannot be distinguished by the study.
Yet the press invariably editorializes, by implication or openly, that each new study somehow builds upon the last; that there exists a slowly but surely growing literature supporting the case that "homosexuality is biological," that "homosexuality is innate," "...genetic," "...unchangeable." Nothing could be further from the truth. It would be identically and oppositely tendentious to say that "yet another study fails to find a biological, genetic, innate basis for homosexuality."
- The study does show involuntary hypothalamic response associated with self-assessed sexual orientation
- The study shows that gay males do react to the estrogen condition but in a different manner than they react to the testosterone condition
- The study cannot shed light on the complicated question of whether sexual orientation of the participants is hard wired.
- The brains of these participants may have acquired a sexual response to these chemicals as the result of past sexual experience. In other word, the response described in this study could well have been learned.
- If these results hold up, this could explain why varying sexual attractions seem so "natural." Also, such conditioning could give insight into why changing sexual attractions is often experienced by those changing sexual preferences as a process of unlearning responses to environmental triggers.
The study is interesting and gives some information about the brain, particularly the hypothalamus. The information is not conclusive and only provides information.
Their studies of straight and gay man were not confirmed by their equal studies of lesbian and straight women. Furthermore, males who identify more with their mothers, and may appear somewhat more "effeminate" in behavior, may still function very adequately and comfortably in normal heterosexual relationships, including marriage and family. There is no study of this group of males. In addition, there is no study of a select group of very masculine appearing and acting (husky) males. The same consideration applies the study of women.
Males who have anxiety about feeling love and closeness to their mothers would unconsciously and--neuroendocrine-wise--erect barriers to similar responses to other females. This might delay their movement into adult heterosexuality but not necessarily or even likely to prevent it. Similar reasoning applies to lesbian females.
The difference between identical twins and fraternal twins has been noted in many other areas of psychological consonance. Identical twins very commonly develop a private language and communication that no one else in the family (especially the mother) can translate. This can last for many years. Therefore, the twin studies (identical and fraternal) do not establish any validity for organicity for homosexuality.
It is well known that rodents usually produce multiple births. It is also well known that when a male embryo lies between two female embryos that it will be a less aggressive male adult rodent than those male rodent embryos who were not so juxtapositioned. What is true for rodents is not true for humans as many other hormone studies have demonstrated.
More than 50 or 60 years an accidental hormonal study was done as I recall in Puerto Rico. Young women were given a drug that affected their sexual hormone balance. This resulted in many children being born whose genitals appeared to be females. These children were raised as little girls without any evidence of discomfort in this social structure. However, when they reached puberty, normal male genitalia developed. What had been thought to be a clitoris turned out to be a penis; and undescended testes descended. Following this unexpected event, the girls-now-turned boys were treated as boys and grew up to be men. Follow-up studies did not indicate any significant increase in homosexuality or decrease in percentage of marriages in this group. This old and infrequently referred to accidental study clearly demonstrates that it takes a great deal of psychological problems in the first five years of life to produce the imperfect conflict resolution of homosexuality. The emotionally charged corridor in the brain is the amygdala and the hypothalamus leading to the pre-frontal cortex. Any emotional charge will cause this area of the brain to show increased activity. Therefore, increased activity in any part of this corridor only indicates an emotional charge, which could be anxiety, anger, depression, or love (to name a few). The study is interesting; but that is all.
Source:- http://www.family.org/cforum/fosi/homosexuality/
Their studies of straight and gay man were not confirmed by their equal studies of lesbian and straight women. Furthermore, males who identify more with their mothers, and may appear somewhat more "effeminate" in behavior, may still function very adequately and comfortably in normal heterosexual relationships, including marriage and family. There is no study of this group of males. In addition, there is no study of a select group of very masculine appearing and acting (husky) males. The same consideration applies the study of women.
Males who have anxiety about feeling love and closeness to their mothers would unconsciously and--neuroendocrine-wise--erect barriers to similar responses to other females. This might delay their movement into adult heterosexuality but not necessarily or even likely to prevent it. Similar reasoning applies to lesbian females.
The difference between identical twins and fraternal twins has been noted in many other areas of psychological consonance. Identical twins very commonly develop a private language and communication that no one else in the family (especially the mother) can translate. This can last for many years. Therefore, the twin studies (identical and fraternal) do not establish any validity for organicity for homosexuality.
It is well known that rodents usually produce multiple births. It is also well known that when a male embryo lies between two female embryos that it will be a less aggressive male adult rodent than those male rodent embryos who were not so juxtapositioned. What is true for rodents is not true for humans as many other hormone studies have demonstrated.
More than 50 or 60 years an accidental hormonal study was done as I recall in Puerto Rico. Young women were given a drug that affected their sexual hormone balance. This resulted in many children being born whose genitals appeared to be females. These children were raised as little girls without any evidence of discomfort in this social structure. However, when they reached puberty, normal male genitalia developed. What had been thought to be a clitoris turned out to be a penis; and undescended testes descended. Following this unexpected event, the girls-now-turned boys were treated as boys and grew up to be men. Follow-up studies did not indicate any significant increase in homosexuality or decrease in percentage of marriages in this group. This old and infrequently referred to accidental study clearly demonstrates that it takes a great deal of psychological problems in the first five years of life to produce the imperfect conflict resolution of homosexuality. The emotionally charged corridor in the brain is the amygdala and the hypothalamus leading to the pre-frontal cortex. Any emotional charge will cause this area of the brain to show increased activity. Therefore, increased activity in any part of this corridor only indicates an emotional charge, which could be anxiety, anger, depression, or love (to name a few). The study is interesting; but that is all.
Source:- http://www.family.org/cforum/fosi/homosexuality/
Thank you michel, very close to what I was about to post.
If people are "born gay" as you propose, then that presents more questions.orichalcum said:
Most of the "gay organizations" recognize "Homosexuals", "Lesbians", "Bi-Sexuals", and "Trans-Sexuals". (They are included in the gay pride parades).
So if, as you contend "people are born being gay", where does that leave "Bi-Sexuals" and "Trans-Sexuals"? Are they considered as people who have made a "lifestyle choice" by those that are born gay? Or as an anomoly by true gays? Or are we now expected to believe that it is also normal for people to be born Bi-Sexual and Trans-Sexual? Or are these simply subgroups of being gay?
The "born gay" proposition sure is a murky argunment, and gay organizations only hurt their cause by accepting in Bi's and Trans' who push the envelope of believablity!
Sabio
Draka
Wonder Woman
If you read my second post in this thread then the bit about bi-sexuals could be possibly explained there. As for trans-genders and trans-sexuals, these are merely people who were gay and felt so much like they were in the wrong gender of body for their sexuality that they had a sex change to correct what they felt was wrong with them or live life as the other sex because it feel more comfortable for them.Sabio said:
.