Listen:
I want to separate this from politics by saying this isn't about gay marriage. This is about our overall feeling about homosexuals.
I was eating lunch with a few people I went to high school with. No names, but they were two girls and one guy. One of the girls told a story about a gay boy who sits next to her in math class, and tells her stories about him having sex with his boyfriend.
She said that she was "anti-gay" and suddenly, the other two people I was with agreed. They agreed that homosexuality was disgusting and wrong.
I volunteered "I actually think it is wonderful!"
"Well, would you go around telling someone you barely know that you had great sex the night before?"
"Well" I said, "I don't think so... well, actually, if I have great sex, I think I would go around and tell everyone how wonderful it was. I don't see why that should be a point of embarrassment or shame."
And everyone laughed.
I felt okay about this conversation, but I left wondering, what does "anti-gay" mean? They are against people being gay? Or they just don't want to hear about it?
I would think that if you are "anti-gay" you must be anti-love. I mean, how could you think that two people loving each other deeply is wrong? The sex of the two lovers shouldn't matter at all.
And, even if love isn't involved, isn't it great that someone is getting some action? I don't mean to be crude or anything, but shouldn't you be happy people are having a good time? When I find out my friends had sex with someone I feel great for them! How wonderful I think! It wouldn't matter if it was a man or a woman they had sex with.
Hell, there isn't the whole pregnancy risk with gay sex huh? That makes it like, twice as good.
Not that I would have gay sex. I'm not a homosexual. I'm just not. I didn't chose to be straight, I just am. I couldn't find men sexually attractive if I tried, just as gay men can't find women sexually attractive.
So, if you think it is a choice, well, you are just going to have to get over that little hurdle.
Saying homosexuality is a choice makes you look ignorant. And please, don't bring religion into rational discussion. Religion destroys rational discussion.
On a side note
Isn't it wonderful that Palin and co. are "tolerant" of gays? As if tolerance was a virtue.
What does tolerance really mean? That you tolerate the existence of gay people? Wow! Thats great, you tolerate the existence of gay people, you don't seek to destroy them. The love this woman has to share! Tolerance!
I hate that word. I tolerate people using that word. I don't punch them in the face for saying it. I just sit there in my anger, and tolerate it.
How about accepting homosexuals? Accepting them for who they are. Accepting that you can't change it, and that they didn't choose to be a homosexual. Accept that they are often proud of who they are. Acceptance is a true virtue. Tolerance is just one step up from hate.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I also hate the word "tolerance".
I hate homosexuality.
I love homosexuals.
Does that make me a gay-hater, or does that make me tolerant? Because I don't consider myself a gay-hater, and I can barely tolerate the word "tolerant".
I'm not sure what that makes you. Religious to be sure.
I have always liked the aspect of Christianity that said to "Hate the sin, love the sinner"
But what makes homosexuality such an "abomination"? What makes it as evil as eating shellfish?
In short, why do you hate homosexuality? I am truly curious.
This is a crazy set of circumstances, at first encounter. I see more and more evidence that homosexuality is something that people are born with, and the biblical prohibitions against it makes less and less sense to me in that context.
People who say the Bible is OK with homosexuality are clearly wrong. It is clearly stated in Leviticus (and then again by Paul in the New Testament) that this is not the case.
Leviticus 18:22 (NIV) says "Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." Leviticus 20:13 (NIV) says "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."
Paul writes about homosexuality in Romans 1:26-27 (NIV), saying "Because of this, God gave them over to sinful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
But there is more and more proof that people who are homosexual are born as homosexuals. People ask, if homosexuality is based on genetics, how could a gene that disfavors reproduction spread so heavily in the population? However, theoretically, if there were a gene for it on the X chromosome, the gene could spread because of heterozygous advantage, or because of an advantage for female carriers of the gene. I am fuzzy about this, and admit my clear ignorance of genetics, of course. It would unreasonable for me to pretend that I know anything in depth about this subject.
But it seems that one cannot reasonably exclude the possibility of a genetic basis for homosexuality.
And so this is certainly a conundrum. For if God created homosexuals, and thus homosexuality, why would He condemn something that He has created? Doesn't the Bible say that all of God's creations are inherently good?
I am forced to admit that something just does not add up in this scenario. I cannot dissuade myself from admitting that homosexuals are born that way. I have friends and they've told me about it, and people I know who have homosexual friends have told me of their friends' testimony that they were born this way. The scientific possibilites which cannot be excluded, combined with the overwhelming personal evidence I have witnessed, build a solid foundation for me to agree that homosexuality is something that one is born with. And even if this is not the case, I have yet to see anyone speculate as to how it could possibly be acquired. Besides, this just seems to be a ridiculous notion to begin with. Why would anyone want to become homosexual, given the overwhelming stigma against and criticism of homosexuality in our society.
And I agree with Mark's testimony on heterosexuality. I was born "straight". I have always been attracted to women. I had no choice. I simply could never find men attractive. And I strongly suspect it is the same way for homosexual people.
I laughed really hard at your post. Oh, this is great. Paragraphs 10 through 12, and the part about tolerating people who "tolerate". Sorry, but I quite literally laughed out loud.
I think the main two reasons people are against homosexuality are their religion, or just the "oddity" of it. There is no logical reason to be anti-gay, because it's no more than who a person is. We might as well be anti-black, or anti-woman. And we would never be that way...
Yeah, when people ask me, how can morality evolve? This is it.
Things like this are generally accepted more and more as people come to realize the truth, that being homosexual is no worse than being anything else, in the same way that people have come to realize this about other things.
well put, mark & alex
Let me leave my input on this. I really don't care if you or any of your readers disagree.
I feel that most "anti-gays" and "homophobes" are only fooling themselves. For quite a while now, I've had a theory on this. The majority of people are friends/best friends with a member of the same sex. If someone was TRULY a homophobe, they would not even be friends with someone of the same sex. They'd be too damn afraid of any member on the same sex. I feel the same way towards gay haters. And as Alex said, I feel it's something everyone is born with. As you grow older and can think for yourself, you choose what you like. We see it in young children. They're all curious. They think nothing of the same sex compared to the opposite. We're not born with a moral code...or are we?
Well, I believe that if I can't really make broad generalizations for you just based on my inadequate knowledge. But I can give you my theories about it. I may be wrong, but this is how it appears to me to happen.
I believe that everyone is born with a predisposition to some form of morality and/or spirituality. However, no one is born with specific religious beliefs, or exact moral principles. These are taught.
Everything that I have seen has made me believe that people are born with a basis for either homosexual or heterosexual tendencies. However, it only makes sense that some people don't talk about it until they were older. People obviously aren't talking about sex when they're in kindergarten (unless they live in Illinois). Haha, just kidding about that one. But the point remains.
You have to be of a certain age and such before you start thinking about your sexuality, and this is true for everyone. So it's obvious to me that people are born with it, even if it's not immediately apparent, because it's not immediately apparent for anyone.
And I am not going to spout off anything about "homophobes" or people who are called that. I'm not a mind reader: I can't tell you how anyone truly feels about homosexuals. So I'm not going to speculate about that part.
I don't think people are "born" one way or the other. It's possible that early childhood events may create a sort of "predisposition," I suppose, in a fashion similar to Freud's famous "Oedipus complex."
I look at it this way, though:
1) Regardless of what a person's "predispositions" may be, nobody is forcing them to engage in homosexuality (or heterosexual promiscuity, for that matter, which is equally bad).
2) People ARE born with the knowledge of right and wrong. CS Lewis does an excellent job of explaining this, calling it the "Law of Nature." It's too long to go into here, but I assume most of you know how to use Google.
So, no one is forcing them to engage in homosexuality. A valid point: except that no one is forcing you to engage in heterosexuality, either. So why shouldn't you refrain from it? If I asked you to do this, you would probably laugh at me. Why? Because it is natural for you to be a heterosexual...just as it is natural for other people to be homosexual. C.S. Lewis, if I recall correctly, does not mention homosexuality anywhere in Mere Christianity. Even if he mentioned it elsewhere, his statements should be taken lightly because he did not have access to the genetic evidence we have today that homosexuality is something people are born with. While Lewis was a brilliant man, I could not possibly expect him to be that brilliant.
Ah yes, C.S. Lewis's "Law of Human Nature" argument from his book "Mere Christianity". I have read that book at least twice, so I am somewhat familiar with it. And for good measure, I just re-read that section of his argument on Google, haha.
You say that people are BORN with the knowledge of right and wrong. I would modify your argument: people are indeed, it seems, born with a basic sense of morality that is reinforced by social convention and teaching. However, this basic morality is NOT the entire criteria of right and wrong that you claim it to be. Our inherent knowledge of ethics is not as expansive as you believe it is. Different cultures and societies have had different ethical standards in different places and at different times in human history. The Bible condones ethnic cleansing and slavery in many sections, but we don't follow those patterns today, because our ethical standards have evolved. If you examine our society's moral standards, I believe you will discover that they have predominently evolved independently of religion. It is highly ironic that many Christians' interpretation of the Bible is more subject to the changing moral standards of our society, than the moral standards of our society are subject to the Bible.
I believe that there is a basic "Law of Human Nature", but that it is shaped by our evolutionary past and reinforced by social conventions, instead of instilled in us by a designer.
Post a Comment