Freethought & Rationalism Archive

GeoTheo · 07-31-2002, 01:27 PM

Do you read your own cut and paste jobs?

Autonemesis · 07-31-2002, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeoTheo:
If I don't call a transvestite Ma'am. I am not opressing him.

If he changes his name legally from Samuel to Samantha, is calling him Samuel opressing him? I think so. How is refusing to use the pronoun she identifies with any different? You seem to be very tolerant, all right -- as long as people stay within your tolerance envelope.

Quote:

You want to change the meaning of the word and force all others to adopt it.

And you want to use the force of the state to prevent people from adopting a definition that has meaning for their lives.

GeoTheo · 07-31-2002, 01:37 PM

No I don't. I don't care if two men or two women gor to New Hampshire and think they are married.
I just don't recognize it. I think they are mistaken. What they have is not marriage. That is my belief. I guess it gets your shorts tied in a knot. Oh well. Can't please everyone.
You are just as intolerant as I, though.

GeoTheo · 07-31-2002, 01:40 PM

I also have never agreed that homosexual behavior is not a choice. We seem to be going in circles. I believed I provided excellent reasons that show why sexual behavior is subject to choice. No one adressed them. Now I am bored. bye.

Autonemesis · 07-31-2002, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeoTheo:
No I don't. I don't care if two men or two women gor to New Hampshire and think they are married.
I just don't recognize it. I think they are mistaken. What they have is not marriage. That is my belief. I guess it gets your shorts tied in a knot. Oh well. Can't please everyone.
You are just as intolerant as I, though.

How so? I have never argued for preventing heterosexuals from marrying, or stated that I think their marriage is not a "real" one -- not even the ones that end in divorce two weeks later.

You can believe that AOL-TW's corporate charter is invalid for whatever reason, but that does not lessen the legal force of the incorporation documents, nor does it make the corporation any less real.

I guess it gets YOUR shorts tied in a knot to think that something you wouldn't recognize as marriage may be recognized despite your objection. Oh well, can't please everyone.

GeoTheo · 07-31-2002, 01:47 PM

I guess I can't help my self. One parting shot.
Scigirl, if you think guys, straight or otherwise,
want to have sex because they are in love you are niave indeed. Guys want to have sex because they are guys. Some homosexuals want people to accept them and so want their behavior to become mainstream. How 'bout this: Make Gay marriage legal and outlaw divorce, even for cases of adultery. Bet you that wouldn't fly with gays.

scigirl · 07-31-2002, 01:52 PM

Geo,

We are just going to agree to disagree, because this does not seem to be going anywhere but down. Which I think we are both to blame for.

Everyone,

If anyone is interested in this subject, read sites here - because they say stuff better than I can, and plus a lot of times they have statistics or examples. Here's one about the definition of homophobe:
<a href="http://religioustolerance.org/hom_phob.htm" target="_blank">religioustolerance.org</a>
Here's another one:
<a href="http://religioustolerance.org/hom_prof.htm" target="_blank">Professional Associations' statements about Homosexuality</a>. Some excerpts (bold is my emphasis):

Quote:

Until the mid 1950's the scientific study of human sexuality was in its infancy; research into sexual orientation was almost unknown. Homosexuality had been condemned by religious leaders for centuries. Almost all gays and lesbians remained securely in the closet. Homosexual behavior was a criminal act in most states of the U.S. It was branded a sexual deviation by mental health professionals. Homosexuality was listed as such by the American Psychiatric Association in their Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Psychiatric Disorders.

During the early 1950's, Psychologist Evelyn Hooker was inspired to undertake research into sexual orientation after having befriended Sam From. He was a gay student who attended one of her psychology classes at UCLA. He didn't seem to fit any of the familiar stereotypes of a gay male. In 1957, she published a report called "The Adjustment of the Male Overt Homosexual." It showed that "homosexuals were not inherently abnormal and that there was no difference between homosexual and heterosexual men in terms of pathology." [...]As of 2001, all of the major professional organizations in the field state that homosexuality is a normal, natural, and fixed sexual orientation.

There are probably about 8 million adults in North America who identify themselves as homosexuals, and who agree with the majority position of therapists. Most therapists counsel their clients to improve their self esteem and accept their orientation as a fact of their lives. But what if most professionals are wrong? What if a "reparative therapy" technique is available that will convert a significant number of gays and lesbians to heterosexuality? Many would seek such therapy, to avoid the lack of physical, employment and accommodation security that gays and lesbians face because of public homophobia. But if that form of counseling is ineffective, then their hopes might be needlessly raised only to be eventually destroyed. The backlash sometimes triggers suicide. The need for accurate information on the long term results of reparative therapy is obviously of great importance.

There are probably about 70 million conservative Christians in North America who believe that homosexuality and bisexuality are chosen preferences; they are unnatural, and can be changed through prayer and/or reparative counseling. Their pastors and denominations generally teach that homosexuality is hated by God and is a very serious sin. If they believe that a person's sexual orientation is chosen during teenage years, then their natural inclination would be to:

* eliminate gay and lesbian teachers from the school system
* ban homosexual support groups in the high school
* work to eliminate any mention of homosexuality in the school curriculum
* minimize any positive or accurate portrayal of gays and lesbians in the media
* keep the age of consent for homosexual activity higher than that of heterosexual activity
* allow discrimination against gays and lesbians in employment and accommodation, in order to make it a less attractive choice
* retain laws that criminalize homosexual behavior
* fight against equal rights for gays and lesbians including the rights to marry and adopt children

But if their beliefs are not based on reality, then they are wasting major effort to discriminate against gays and lesbians for no justifiable reason. If sexual orientation is pre-determined rather than chosen, then gays will become gays no matter what the level of discrimination in society. One might as well discriminate against people with black skin or blue eyes.

Recent Statements by Professional Associations
In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Psychiatric Disorders. The American Psychological Association declared that it was not a disorder in 1975.

Recent statements by professional organizations include:

The American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses in 1973.

The American Law Institute continually updates its Model Penal Code, which is a group of laws that they suggest be implemented at the state level. They recommend to legislators: "that private sexual behavior between consenting adults should be removed from the list of crimes and thereby legalized."

The American Bar Association in 1974 expressed its approval of the Model Penal Code, including its decriminalization of consensual adult homosexual acts.

The World Health Organization removed homosexuality from its list of mental illnesses in 1981.

The American Psychological Association released a Statement on Homosexuality in 1994-JUL. Their first two paragraphs are:
The research on homosexuality is very clear. Homosexuality is neither mental illness nor moral depravity. It is simply the way a minority of our population expresses human love and sexuality. Study after study documents the mental health of gay men and lesbians. Studies of judgment, stability, reliability, and social and vocational adaptiveness all show that gay men and lesbians function every bit as well as heterosexuals.

Nor is homosexuality a matter of individual choice. Research suggests that the homosexual orientation is in place very early in the life cycle, possibly even before birth. It is found in about ten percent of the population, a figure which is surprisingly constant across cultures, irrespective of the different moral values and standards of a particular culture. Contrary to what some imply, the incidence of homosexuality in a population does not appear to change with new moral codes or social mores. Research findings suggest that efforts to repair homosexuals are nothing more than social prejudice garbed in psychological accouterments.

GeoTheo mentioned there is no precedent for allowing gays to marry. Of course there isn't - we are just now figuring out, with careful scientific inquiry, that being gay is not a choice. We are just now beginning to understand homosexuality, we understand it a lot more than we did during biblical times. Therefore the laws should change accordingly. It is our obligation as human beings to root out injustice, especially when that injustice was founded on false premises (such as . . . gays choose to be gay).

What does this have to do with the name of this thread? Well as a scientist, I agree with the findings of the above agencies - that gays are not different, they are normal, and they are born that way (or at least do not choose to be gay). As a secular humanist, I believe in the rights of all people, regardless of religion, race, gender, etc, etc.

When I was at the Baptist Board, it was apparent to me that the religion was often being used to defend homophobia - and I met and talked to several people at the BB who agreed with some, or even all, of the asterisked actions above (I put them in italics). I believe in my heart that it isn't the religion which causes homophobia (I actually have weird evolutionary explanations, which I can discuss later if anyone is interested). However, I still feel that because religion plays such a vital role in our society, it is often used as a justification for the anti-gay sentiments and actions that are in italics above. So if I want to try and right the wrongs as I see it, I must try and attack the reasons we have the wrongs in the first place.

Hence. . . my constant criticism of many church's stance on homosexuality. Yes I would argue christian theology with the pope himself (even though I am an atheist) to try and open people's minds to the possibility that their religion is wrong on this issue, so that homosexuals everywhere can enjoy the same freedoms I have.

Thank you for listening, everyone.

scigirl

Mageth · 07-31-2002, 01:54 PM

GeoTheo:

Whatever your opinions, I'm not sure you have the qualifications to express yourself as if you're a spokesperson for all "guys", or an expert on guydom, or on homosexuality for than matter.

scigirl · 07-31-2002, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GeoTheo:
Guys want to have sex because they are guys. Some homosexuals want people to accept them and so want their behavior to become mainstream. How 'bout this: Make Gay marriage legal and outlaw divorce, even for cases of adultery. Bet you that wouldn't fly with gays.

Or straights either.

So we should outlaw just gay marriages because all guys, including you, are pervs? Once once again, your logic escapes me.

scigirl

[ July 31, 2002: Message edited by: scigirl ]</p>

scigirl · 07-31-2002, 02:16 PM

Can anyone who is familiar with the Bible help me with these questions I posed earlier?

Quote:

Originally posted by scigirl:
Also, what bible verses specifically talk about sex before marriage? And which parts of the 4 gospels from Jesus's words (I.E. the words in red in MML or J, not from Paulianity) condemned homosexuality or sex before marriage? [...]IIRC, Jesus was fairly silent on both topics.

My theory is, that outside of Leviticus (which contains archaic laws that no one follows anymore) and romans (which contains Paul's interpretation of Jesus's teachings, but not the teachings directly), the Bible is notoriously silent on both homosexuality, and on sex before marriage. Can anyone prove this right or wrong?

Thanks,

scigirl

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-31-2002, 01:27 PM	#71
GeoTheo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Bemidji Posts: 1,197	Do you read your own cut and paste jobs?

07-31-2002, 01:37 PM	#73
GeoTheo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Bemidji Posts: 1,197	No I don't. I don't care if two men or two women gor to New Hampshire and think they are married. I just don't recognize it. I think they are mistaken. What they have is not marriage. That is my belief. I guess it gets your shorts tied in a knot. Oh well. Can't please everyone. You are just as intolerant as I, though.

07-31-2002, 01:40 PM	#74
GeoTheo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Bemidji Posts: 1,197	I also have never agreed that homosexual behavior is not a choice. We seem to be going in circles. I believed I provided excellent reasons that show why sexual behavior is subject to choice. No one adressed them. Now I am bored. bye.

07-31-2002, 01:47 PM	#76
GeoTheo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Bemidji Posts: 1,197	I guess I can't help my self. One parting shot. Scigirl, if you think guys, straight or otherwise, want to have sex because they are in love you are niave indeed. Guys want to have sex because they are guys. Some homosexuals want people to accept them and so want their behavior to become mainstream. How 'bout this: Make Gay marriage legal and outlaw divorce, even for cases of adultery. Bet you that wouldn't fly with gays.

07-31-2002, 01:54 PM	#78
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	GeoTheo: Whatever your opinions, I'm not sure you have the qualifications to express yourself as if you're a spokesperson for all "guys", or an expert on guydom, or on homosexuality for than matter.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.