The Gay Issue

A really important question here has been whether it is a learned behaviour, or a natural thing. The very progressive will say, why does it matter - people should be allowed to chose or be their sexuality and be accepted for it. The very conservative will also say, why does it matter, it is still wrong.

Perhaps it is time not to focus on this distinction, but it currently exists all the same. Do you think it should be important in this issue, or do you think that it being a choice or nature are besides the point? Your answer should be regardless of this coming from the liberal or conservative view.

Is the behaviour vs nature question relevant?

Fetching blurbs now... please stand by

No, it should be treated the same way regardless.

Naked_Girl says:

Homosexuality is like greatness: Some are born gay, some achieve gayness and some have gayness thrust upon them.

There are those of us who know we are gay from a very very young age, so you could argue it's genetic. Some of us start to realise we are gay much later in life, and it's a journey through sexuality, so you could argue it's behavioural. And some of us meet a person who knocks our socks off, and even though we don't think of ourselves as gay, we are for this person. And that's inexplicable.

I think sexuality is fluid, arguments can be made for nature or nurture, but it shouldn't matter either way.

Posted November 18, 2009

Stazjia says:

A person's sexual orientation is nobody's business but their own. I really object to people setting themselves up as judge and jury on other people's behaviour as long as it doesn't break the law.

Posted July 06, 2009

dannystaple says:

Ah but from my point of view, even if it is chosen behaviour, that still should not justify Christian, Muslim or other hate groups. Also, those hate groups and people offering a "cure" will not stop even if it is proven. Proof rarely appeals to such people. I would like to think that if someone chose to have a mix of gay and het relationships that they would not be maltreated for it. Disproof/proof of genetic disposition should not permit bigotry.

Posted April 22, 2009

dannystaple says:

My own opinion on this is that my view on the gay issue will not be altered by if the behaviour is learned, nurtured, chosen or genetic.

Posted March 13, 2009

Yes, it makes every difference.

mysticmama says:

Yes it is relevent in the reality that fundamental Christian hate groups are still using "chosen lifestyle" to feul their hate campaigns. Science has proven that it is genetic, but hate groups refuse to aknowledge facts and are still actively trying to "cure" gay people.

Posted April 22, 2009

Neil says:

I think if it is ever proven to be a natural thing then that is one additional argument to relieve any guilt which a gay person may feel from the verbal abuse that may have gone his way.

Posted March 13, 2009

 

• Share this conversation
  • Stumbleupon
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • Twitter
  • Digg
  • Delicious
  • RSS
  • Email

Are you at peace with the concept? Or are you going to fight this thing tooth and claw? DO you think it should be suppressed and driven out, or that it should be expressed (at least with some propriety - like heterosexual relationships) and permitted?

Please note I will reject any blurbs that are too hateful.

Should gay people be accepted?

Fetching blurbs now... please stand by

Yes, me, my freind, neighbour, brother or sister are gay.

Naked_Girl says:

I'd say I'm quite acceptable, thanks very much ;)

Posted November 18, 2009

Stazjia says:

Certainly. I have friends who are gay and they have been there for me when I needed a friend as have straight friends. I don't judge my friends or acquaintances by their sexual orientation - it's none of my business.

Posted July 06, 2009

mysticmama says:

It's sad that this is even a question in today's world. All people should be accepted, and anyone who uses "christianity" to hate gays is not very christian!

Posted April 22, 2009

No, I am a fully paid up member of the Westborough Baptist Church

 

• Share this conversation
  • Stumbleupon
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • Twitter
  • Digg
  • Delicious
  • RSS
  • Email

One subject that has certainly brought this area front and centre of religious and political discussion are same sex marriages. There are many schools of thought on this. I have tried to describe each as if from that point of view. Again - do not mistake those views for my own.

• Marriage, is defined by the bible as a man and a woman.
  If you are a biblical scholar, I do not know if this can actually truly be found in scripture, but it is something that is often said. This would mean that by its very definition it excludes gay marriage.


• Marriage allows a couple to show their dedication to each other
  Regardless of their sexuality, by being together, a couples bond is increased by celebrating and making formal their relationship. It means that society as a whole is more cohesive, and because people are supporting each other, less of a burden to the state as they look after each other. They are more likely to have good, happy lives.


• Marriage is only for the sake of children.
  A gay couple is unlikely to have children (adoption topics aside) so marriage, being for the sake of children, is pointless and should not be supported for gay couples. This may mean it is also not suitable for those not intending or otherwise unable to have children.


• Allowing gay marriage weakens the concept of marriage.
  Allowing this cheapens marriage, makes it more of a casual thing. Gay people are expected to be more promiscuous so this makes it more likely that divorces will follow. Diluting it to allow further definition may open up a can of worms to allow many other forms of marriage - like bigamy.


• Consenting adults who love each other should be able to make this choice.
  Love should be allowed to express itself in this form. It is an affront to love that marriages representing almost business-like arrangements between hetero couples are allowed when marriages representing only love between homosexual couples are not permitted.


• Marriage is a matter of expressing a long term love - Any couple wanting to really show long term love should consider this to show their commitment to each other.


• Any marriage is a bonding of people that is good for the fabric of society, be it straight or gay


• A Gay Couple, through marriage should be able to expect some of the legal privileges through marriage that any straight couple should.

Do you support gay marriage?

Fetching blurbs now... please stand by

Why not, if people love each other, it should be their choice.

Stazjia says:

I know gay couples who have been together for more than 30 years - a lot longer than many 'straight' marriages. Of course, gay couples should be allowed to make a legal and public commitment to each other.

Posted July 06, 2009

mysticmama says:

Of course, especially in todays society were gay marriages often last longer than "straight" marriages, it's sad that so many people treat marriage as a temporary condition.

Posted April 22, 2009

Marriage should only be for one man and one woman.

 

• Share this conversation
  • Stumbleupon
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • Twitter
  • Digg
  • Delicious
  • RSS
  • Email