Homosexuality - Is It Right?

[Tim_The_Enchanter]

The original question in the thread seemed to be "is homosexuality MORALLY correct". Moral in it's classic sense is based on a religious concept. Morals are derived from biblical and religious teachings. Therefore, if we are looking at morality in a classic, religious sense, homosexuality IS wrong because the majority Abrahamic teachings say homosexuality is a religious abomination.

On a personal note, I support full and equal rights to homosexuals and their relationships. I believe American mass society needs to move past it's primitive, Protestant Moral ruling and into a society that embraces free thought and supports full and equal rights to all peoples.

 

[blazedaces]

The original question in the thread seemed to be "is homosexuality MORALLY correct". Moral in it's classic sense is based on a religious concept. Morals are derived from biblical and religious teachings. Therefore, if we are looking at morality in a classic, religious sense, homosexuality IS wrong because the majority Abrahamic teachings say homosexuality is a religious abomination.

Morals are simply beliefs about what is right and wrong.

Ethics is taking that to a theoretical level where we try to place objectivity to an otherwise subjective system.

Religion is purposefully not involved.

And to top that off, who cares what the main monotheistic religions say about homosexuality? There are hundreds of religions all over the world. That's why you can't base laws or ethical codes off of any one. There's no objectivity.

-blazed

 

[Tim_The_Enchanter]

Morals are simply beliefs about what is right and wrong.

Ethics is taking that to a theoretical level where we try to place objectivity to an otherwise subjective system.

Religion is purposefully not involved.

And to top that off, who cares what the main monotheistic religions say about homosexuality? There are hundreds of religions all over the world. That's why you can't base laws or ethical codes off of any one. There's no objectivity.

-blazed

The term "Ethic" is also rooted in Abrahamism. Also, Christianity is the most widely practiced religion in the entire world, so that's why I mentioned those religions.

 

[marthanoob]

I have a feeling that a century from now discrimination against homosexuals will be as "wrong" as slavery is now.

 

[blazedaces]

The term "Ethic" is also rooted in Abrahamism. Also, Christianity is the most widely practiced religion in the entire world, so that's why I mentioned those religions.

Provide evidence. Quite frankly, I don't believe you. There is nothing theoretical or rational about the religious set of morals. No offense.

But ethical theories strive to set objective theories to rationally determine ethical points of view of right and wrong.

-blazed

 

[Tim_The_Enchanter]

Provide evidence. Quite frankly, I don't believe you. There is nothing theoretical or rational about the religious set of morals. No offense.

But ethical theories strive to set objective theories to rationally determine ethical points of view of right and wrong.

-blazed

Look up "Protestant Ethic". You might learn something.

 

[MojoMan]

The term "Ethic" is also rooted in Abrahamism. Also, Christianity is the most widely practiced religion in the entire world, so that's why I mentioned those religions.

A teacher of mine told me Islam is the most practiced religion (I may be wrong). And even so, I'm not going to believe what religion says unless it gives proof. And everyone who is anti-gay because of religion's backup is usually that it is a crime against God to be gay. Well, in most religions, God created us all, and if he/she created us all, if God didn't like gays, why would he create gays?

 

[blazedaces]

Look up "Protestant Ethic". You might learn something.

Tim, I would like to say this without being insulting:

Stop being arrogant. Talking in a condescending tone does not make you sound any smarter/better/cooler.

That being said, let's move on.

Utilitarianism was first proposed by greek philosophers such as Epicurus and Socrates, before Christianity existed and free from any religious base.

Protestant ethics, while a way of life originally derived from protestantism, has nothing to do with modern day ethical theory. It's not even really an ethical theory in and of itself. It simply is a way of living such that you work hard and strive to basically make a lot of money (the perfect way to promote capitalism in its purest form).

You would not be able to support an ethical society today basing your ethical codes on protestant ethics.

Religion has nothing but absolutes about what you should and should not do. There is often no rhyme or reason other than "God said so"...

-blazed

 

[e__]

A teacher of mine told me Islam is the most practiced religion (I may be wrong).

I believe the numbers are 2.? billion for Christianity, 1.? billion for Hindu, and 800 million for Islam. No matter, there are about 3 billion people, around half of the population, that believe in an Abraham based religion.

Moving on, I'm also going to point out that the main society that spread Christianity, the Romans, had a very regular habit of having homosexual relationships.

Utilitarianism was first proposed by greek philosophers such as Epicurus and Socrates, before Christianity existed and free from any religious base.

They celebrated the Greek legends with Zeus, right? If that is the case, then they did not believe homosexuality to be wrong, as there were many homosexual relationships in the Greek myths. Therefore, from the origin of the word, homosexuality is not "ethically" wrong.

This is getting entirely too technical though, and doesn't reflect a modernized viewpoint on homosexuality. But, I don't believe Christianity does the same either, so I believe that religion should be kept out of the debate.

 

[PRINCESS PEACH777]

I have nothing against Homosexuality some of my friends are gay and they have boyfriends and their parents have no problem with that so they should live normally they have the right to do what they want because it's their lifes i mean no one would like to stop living happily.

 

[The Dinkoman]

Homosexuality is not bad. You cant judge a person by the way they are, I my self am not homosexual but i know some people who are and there happy together. Thats really all that counts if your happy with it.

 

[marthanoob]

Homosexuality is not bad. You cant judge a person by the way they are, I my self am not homosexual but i know some people who are and there happy together. Thats really all that counts if your happy with it.

Happiness has nothing to do with it. People kill other people and are happy about it. The issue is rooted in individual freedom and human rights.

 

[Tim_The_Enchanter]

I said it in my first post in this thread, I have absolutely nothing against homosexuals, I believe anyone should be able to live the way they want as long as they aren't seriously disrupting the lives of the people around them. I actually am friends with multiple homosexuals and I participate in their pride events.

But again, many people base their morals on what their religion teaches them to, and considering the top two most practiced religions are Abrahamic, the mass society would probably see it as MORALLY improper.

Again, I believe that homosexuality should be supported in society and homosexual couples should be given all of the rights and privileges that heterosexual couples receive.

 

[arrowhead]

But again, many people base their morals on what their religion teaches them to, and considering the top two most practiced religions are Abrahamic, the mass society would probably see it as MORALLY improper.

the religions don't teach human equality. they say things comparable to "black people shouldn't have rights because they might turn into killer dinosaurs and rip us to shreds!"

as long as the US advertises itself as the "land of the free", religion should have nothing to do with legislation. and gay people should have equal rights

 

[Tim_The_Enchanter]

the religions don't teach human equality. they say things comparable to "black people shouldn't have rights because they might turn into killer dinosaurs and rip us to shreds!"

as long as the US advertises itself as the "land of the free", religion should have nothing to do with legislation. and gay people should have equal rights

The United States was founded by, and is still run on, Christians with Christian moral beliefs.

 

[arrowhead]

The United States was founded by, and is still run on, Christians with Christian moral beliefs.

this is no reason to ignore the first amendment, nor deny minorities rights.

you can either have full equality, or you can have christianity.

 

[Tim_The_Enchanter]

this is no reason to ignore the first amendment, nor deny minorities rights.

you can either have full equality, or you can have christianity.

You can't have ANY equality if you have Christianity. But that's enough of that.

There is no question that the First Amendment should be MUCH more broad and just, however we do not have a current government that is allowing that to exist.

 

[AltF4]

The United States was founded by, and is still run on, Christians with Christian moral beliefs.

The United States is in no sense founded upon the Christian doctrine.
~ George Washington Administration Treaty

In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson

 

[Tim_The_Enchanter]

The United States is in no sense founded upon the Christian doctrine.
~ George Washington Administration Treaty

In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson

Fair enough. The Protestants who first colonized and settled here came here to practice their religion freely. Therefore, I assume they had some form of Protestant Ethic and Christian moral system.

 

[AltF4]

That may be, but America, and specifically American laws have no place for christian doctrine. It is an utterly irrelevant point to make that the original colonies had christian followers.

Isaac Newton was a vindictive and psychotic nutjob. Should all physicists then live in their parents attic for the majority of their lives like he did?

 

[Aesir]

Why does their religious affiliation matter? They came to America seeking religious freedom not to start a religious state.

Furthermore I don't see how you can argue that when our forefathers who were largely against religion influencing the government and viceversa.

 

[Tim_The_Enchanter]

Okay, we have officially gone off topic. I agree with you Alt, religion should have absolutely no influence on government affairs or U.S. laws.

 

[DARKALONDITE]

Homosexuality is neither right nor wrong. It's like asking is heterosexuality right or wrong. It's a person's choice and human beings need to learn to accept people who are different from them. We humans tend to see anything that is strange, different , or against the norm as evil or wrong, and we need to learn to overcome that.

 

[Crimson King]

I never chose to be heterosexual. I was just only attracted to females. I don't see how that's a choice.

 

[blazedaces]

I never chose to be heterosexual. I was just only attracted to females. I don't see how that's a choice.

Right now I could go find a homosexual man to have sex with. I could, while having sex, close my eyes and, once I get past some nausea (sorry, I'm being honest), start to use my imagination and derive pleasure from the act. I could do this many, many times until I've adopted my body to literally "enjoy sexual intercourse with another man".

I don't see how this isn't a choice.

The point is though, CK, that neither of our statements relies on scientific evidence. Why does it matter if I "see" it or not?

-blazed

 

[arrowhead]

Right now I could go find a homosexual man to have sex with. I could, while having sex, close my eyes and, once I get past some nausea (sorry, I'm being honest), start to use my imagination and derive pleasure from the act. I could do this many, many times until I've adopted my body to literally "enjoy sexual intercourse with another man".

I don't see how this isn't a choice.

The point is though, CK, that neither of our statements relies on scientific evidence. Why does it matter if I "see" it or not?

-blazed

it's not a choice to directly alter your sexual orientation. the choice is going through inconvenient "therapy" to change the orientation, assuming what you said works.

 

[Pluvia's other account]

Right now I could go find a homosexual man to have sex with. I could, while having sex, close my eyes and, once I get past some nausea (sorry, I'm being honest), start to use my imagination and derive pleasure from the act. I could do this many, many times until I've adopted my body to literally "enjoy sexual intercourse with another man".

I don't see how this isn't a choice.

The point is though, CK, that neither of our statements relies on scientific evidence. Why does it matter if I "see" it or not?

-blazed

It doesn't work like that. Almost everyone knows their sexual orientation before they've had sex.

What you outlined was a choice, but how many heterosexual guys do you know that have done that? You can have sex with the same sex, but that wouldn't make you gay. Your sexual orientation would be for females, no matter how much you tried to pretend it's not.

 

[SuperBowser]

Right now I could go find a homosexual man to have sex with. I could, while having sex, close my eyes and, once I get past some nausea (sorry, I'm being honest), start to use my imagination and derive pleasure from the act. I could do this many, many times until I've adopted my body to literally "enjoy sexual intercourse with another man".

I don't see how this isn't a choice.

The point is though, CK, that neither of our statements relies on scientific evidence. Why does it matter if I "see" it or not?

-blazed

That's... not how sexual orientation works. Is it?

Maybe I'm reading what you wrote wrong, but you can't change what gender you are naturally attracted to.

 

[blazedaces]

it's not a choice to directly alter your sexual orientation. the choice is going through inconvenient "therapy" to change the orientation, assuming what you said works.

I fail to see the difference. The problem, again, lies in the vagueness of the word choice. I don't care about "choice" so much as I care to point out that environmental influence can possibly alter...

It doesn't work like that. Almost everyone knows their sexual orientation before they've had sex.

Prove it.

What you outlined was a choice, but how many heterosexual guys do you know that have done that?

It doesn't matter. You're taking the extreme that sexual orientation can't possibly under any circumstances ever be changed, no matter what environmental influences a person goes through. If I even name one way we can imagine otherwise your theory falls apart.

You can have sex with the same sex, but that wouldn't make you gay. Your sexual orientation would be for females, no matter how much you tried to pretend it's not.

Prove it.

That's... not how sexual orientation works. Is it?

Maybe I'm reading what you wrote wrong, but you can't change what gender you are naturally attracted to.

Prove it.

-blazed

Edit: Answer me this, can you change what foods you like? Yes or no? Can you at one point in your life hate a food, and then eventually like it? Why is the act of eating any different than the act of sex? What in the world makes sex so special in this world?!

Second Edit:

This has nothing to do with whether homosexuality is right or wrong. Whether it's a choice or not doesn't matter. The lifestyle itself is ethically right in every possible sense of the word ethic. I dare anyone to look at an ethical theory and try to prove homosexuality is wrong (choice or not).

 

[arrowhead]

blazed believes that sexual orientation is influenced by the environment because there hasn't been any evidence suggesting that it's genetic. this is probably true. depending on the culture you grew up in, gay sex has different levels of "grossness". for example, the ancient greeks would have gay sex all the time. it would be silly to assume they were all genetically bisexual.

but i disagree with him when he says sexual orientation a choice. maybe because his definition of choice is different from mine.

 

[blazedaces]

but i disagree with him when he says sexual orientation a choice. maybe because his definition of choice is different from mine.

It's just a bickering of word salad. We would both be using the word "choice" but mean entirely different things. Can we agree it's a waste of both our times?

I don't care about convincing you it's a choice. I'm just going with the evidence and the evidence suggests the only influence on sexual orientation is environmental.

-blazed

 

[cman]

It's just a bickering of word salad. We would both be using the word "choice" but mean entirely different things. Can we agree it's a waste of both our times?

I don't care about convincing you it's a choice. I'm just going with the evidence and the evidence suggests the only influence on sexual orientation is environmental.

-blazed

What 'evidence' says that? Afaik most reputable organizations all agree that it is primarily hereditary. If it is environmental, then why don't kids who grow up in gays households always turn out gay, and why do kids who grow up in straight households sometimes turn out to be gay?

 

[arrowhead]

It's just a bickering of word salad. We would both be using the word "choice" but mean entirely different things. Can we agree it's a waste of both our times?

I don't care about convincing you it's a choice. I'm just going with the evidence and the evidence suggests the only influence on sexual orientation is environmental.

-blazed

yeah, i agree with that

cman:

What 'evidence' says that? Afaik most reputable organizations all agree that it is primarily hereditary. If it is environmental, then why don't kids who grow up in gays households always turn out gay, and why do kids who grow up in straight households sometimes turn out to be gay?

what evidence do you have to suggest it's genetically goverened? most of what we are is through environmental shaping. and just being around gay people doesn't make a person gay. there are other factors that contribute.

 

[Pluvia's other account]

List all these enviromental factors then.

 

[arrowhead]

List all these enviromental factors then.

i don't know all of them (like that was a reasonable request anyways :/). one of them is growing up with the idea that all sex is pleasurable and not straying from that ideal. others can be chemical factors during growth.

but my ability to satisfy you with an answer doesn't detract from the validity of the claim. i doubt any of you can tell me the genetic code that makes someone gay and locate it on the chromosome.

 

[Pluvia's other account]

i don't know all of them (like that was a reasonable request anyways :/). one of them is growing up with the idea that all sex is pleasurable and not straying from that ideal. others can be chemical factors during growth.

but my ability to satisfy you with an answer doesn't detract from the validity of the claim. i doubt any of you can tell me the genetic code that makes someone gay and locate it on the chromosome.

That doesn't hold any ground. I doubt any of you can find the environmental factors that makes someone gay.

 

[arrowhead]

That doesn't hold any ground. I doubt any of you can find the environmental factors that makes someone gay.

...i just gave you one: human interactions

going back to my other post, the ancient greeks used to have gay sex all the time. do you actually think they were all genetically bisexual?

 

[Pluvia's other account]

...i just gave you one: human interactions

going back to my other post, the ancient greeks used to have gay sex all the time. do you actually think they were all genetically bisexual?

Human interactions doesn't hold any ground either, otherwise all straight households would raise straight kids.

And nobody can prove or disprove anything about the ancient Greeks.

Anyway, I decided to ask my gay friend, Ben, some questions, here they are:

(22:54) Mr Tyler: yeah so i'm just here to ask you some questions so I could copy and paste
(22:54) Mr Tyler: if you don't mind?
(22:54) Ben: oki
(22:54) Ben: sure
(22:54) Mr Tyler: right
(22:54) Mr Tyler: when did you know you were gay?
(22:54) Ben: about 12/13
(22:55) Mr Tyler: and you had sex with a guy or a girl first?
(22:55) Ben: girl
(22:57) Mr Tyler: did you know you were gay before you had sex?
(22:57) Ben: yeah
(22:58) Mr Tyler: how?
(22:58) Ben: the same way a straight guy knows he is straight
(22:58) Ben: imsexually attracted to males
(23:04) Mr Tyler: do you think you were born gay?
(23:04) Ben: yes
(23:34) Mr Tyler: we you brought up in a gay houshold?
(23:35) Ben: no
(23:36) Mr Tyler: did you know any gay people that you think could've made you gay?
(23:36) Mr Tyler: by like, enviromental influences?
(23:37) Ben: no
(23:37) Ben: i didnt knwo any gay ppl when i knew iwas gay

I guess you could say that this doesn't prove anything, but so far it's a step above anything anyone else has produced.

 

[cman]

...i just gave you one: human interactions

going back to my other post, the ancient greeks used to have gay sex all the time. do you actually think they were all genetically bisexual?

You have no way of knowing whether their gay sex was for bonding or fun or genuine attraction. We are talking about people truely attracted to the same sex, and there are many different motivations for sex in addition to attraction

 

[SuperBowser]

Prove it.

-blazed

Edit: Answer me this, can you change what foods you like? Yes or no? Can you at one point in your life hate a food, and then eventually like it? Why is the act of eating any different than the act of sex? What in the world makes sex so special in this world?!

Second Edit:

This has nothing to do with whether homosexuality is right or wrong. Whether it's a choice or not doesn't matter. The lifestyle itself is ethically right in every possible sense of the word ethic. I dare anyone to look at an ethical theory and try to prove homosexuality is wrong (choice or not).

I agree that choice is irrelevant to the discussion of right or wrong or legality. But choice is still an important discussion point because gay people themselves claim they don't have a choice and for a sensitive subject like this, people do care.

Sexual orientation is not comparable to liking a type of food. It's something that is established in childhood and is irreversible thereafter. Environmental influence may establish orientation, but has nothing to do with changing it.

The best proof I can give you atm is that no one has ever claimed they can change their orientation (that wasn't lying...). No behavioural treatment exists that changes orientation. If there was we'd have heard of it by now.

I think the burden of proof is on you...