Question to Christians

[Drakim]

(this is aimed at Christians who thinks that homosexuality is sinful and that they should abstain from homosexual relations)

Would you still think homosexuality is sinful if we found out with complete certanly that you are born with it, as opposed to choosing it?

From a Christian viewpoint, it wouldn't fit in with Yahweh making it possible to be born with a sexual orientation that causes you to sin and most likely be sent to hell. Imagine that in some other situation, like Yahweh making some people being born with a strong urge to kill or rape people.

Also, if we alongside with the disscovery that homosexuality is something you are born with, we could also block the gene that causes it, with a pill that the mother can take to hinder it from developing, would you support it? We are infact talking about modifying the babys basic properties here, by chaning it genes. If you support it, would you support pills which made sure that the baby has that and that hair and eye color? His tastes? Build? Intelligence?

If you don't support such a pill, but still think homosexuality is a sin, then, are you demanding that somebody abstain from being who he/she was made by nature as default? Wouldn't it seem harsh and unfair to demand that somebody who has perfectly naturally been born with homosexuality, should ignore his/her real sexual orientation and pretend that he/she can be attracted to the opposite sex? (which would be just as hard as it would be for you to be gay)

[LazyDrunk]

At 3/13/08 09:20 AM, Drakim wrote: (this is aimed at Christians who thinks that homosexuality is sinful and that they should abstain from homosexual relations)

Would you still think homosexuality is sinful if we found out with complete certanly that you are born with it, as opposed to choosing it?

I would say that homosexuality is genetic the same way some people are genetically inclined to rape and murder. So looking at same-sex ass gets you hard, from birth? What about that person's upbringing, doesn't that have more to do with sexual attraction than abstract DNA, much of which doesn't even form into specific roles until later in life?

When I mentioned people who are born with rape/murder tendencies, I mean that to some people, the act of raping and murdering triggers pleasure receptors in the brain, letting them know that the behavior is right to them. Their are social restraints in place, obviously, to protect potential rape/murder victims.

You may counter than being gay isn't detrimental to a person's health, or not detrimental enough to legislate against the homosexual behavior in question.

I can't buy the argument that a baby has any sort of sexual preference, which is what you assumed when you queried if gayness was certain upon birth.

From a Christian viewpoint, it wouldn't fit in with Yahweh making it possible to be born with a sexual orientation that causes you to sin and most likely be sent to hell. Imagine that in some other situation, like Yahweh making some people being born with a strong urge to kill or rape people.

I didn't read this part before responding. Just because something feels right doesn't mean it's beneficial for the whole. That's why some drugs are illegal, but some aren't. Most sex is legal, some forms aren't.

changing genes

Bad idea all around.

[arcansi]

At 3/13/08 09:20 AM, Drakim wrote:
Would you still think homosexuality is sinful if we found out with complete certanly that you are born with it, as opposed to choosing it?

Hah! You're born with it? Dont make me laugh, it's a choice, there is no such thing as a "gay gene".

From a Christian viewpoint, it wouldn't fit in with Yahweh making it possible to be born with a sexual orientation that causes you to sin and most likely be sent to hell. Imagine that in some other situation, like Yahweh making some people being born with a strong urge to kill or rape people.

Yahweh is Jewish. You're basically saying that we cannot be born gay. Because you said that God wouldn't let us be born with a sexual orientation that caused us to sin. That's why its a choice.

Also, if we alongside with the disscovery that homosexuality is something you are born with, we could also block the gene that causes it, with a pill that the mother can take to hinder it from developing, would you support it? We are infact talking about modifying the babys basic properties here, by chaning it genes. If you support it, would you support pills which made sure that the baby has that and that hair and eye color? His tastes? Build? Intelligence?

As soon as you start manipulating a persons DNA to make it perfect, you destroy what it is that makes us human. We're all individuals, and that's how the world evolves, too many "perfect" people would cause lack of superiority and inferiority. Society thrives on leadership and underlings, make us all equal and we'll encounter problems.

If you don't support such a pill, but still think homosexuality is a sin, then, are you demanding that somebody abstain from being who he/she was made by nature as default? Wouldn't it seem harsh and unfair to demand that somebody who has perfectly naturally been born with homosexuality, should ignore his/her real sexual orientation and pretend that he/she can be attracted to the opposite sex? (which would be just as hard as it would be for you to be gay)

Homosexuality is a choice, or a taste if you will, for people of the same gender. It is not a disease, as their is no birth defect or brain deformation, or even another living entity that could cause it. You cannot be "naturally born" with homosexuality, it's a choice. Gays have been hiding behind this "gay gene" theory that hasn't been proven, in an effort to take no responsibility for their own actions.

[kidray76]

I'll just sum this up. Homosexuality is a choose. Not born into it. Your born neutral. Your influenced by other factors: enviroment/family/friends/industry/tv/ex perimentation.

Prime example is people who start out straight lives, then turn gay. Also vice a versa. All religions is a choose, if you believe in Christianity, then you take those ideasl. No one can prove without a shadow of a doubt which religion is true, or even real for that matter.

[Earfetish]

I guess they'd view it like a baby born with a birth defect who died before being baptised.

Ie, push it from their mind when trying to rationalise their views.

Everyone saying 'it's a choice, you can't be born with it, yadda yadda yadda' knows far less about this subject than eminent sexologists, and even they don't know. Probably a subtle combination of both nature and nurture, really, like you might be born being susceptible to fetishism but it took a few Bugs Bunny episodes to make you a furry.

[ABsoldier17]

Homosexuality isn't in the DNA. That is an excuse used by weak minded (usually gay males) to avoid confronting the idea that they actually chose this. However I am a believer in free will, they chose it, thus I won't make too much noise about it.
Messing with genes is very bad.

[KingPaulP]

Homosexuality may vary well be to do with anatomical differences in the brain, the hypothalamus is smaller in male>female transexuals when compared to a male control group, there may very well be differences in some homosexuals as well, enviromental factors are also very important though.

Plus I dont think anybody has answered the OP question...

[Togukawa]

In my opinion it's just as much of a choice as it is not to like certain kinds of food, say cooked liver. What does it matter if one doesn't like liver because of something in the genes, or because of a tragedy involving liver and a spanking at a young age, the fact still remains that the person really doesn't like to eat liver.

Is it a sin if someone that really doesn't like liver chooses not to eat liver for the rest of his life, but instead eat things he does like? Is he weakminded for it?

If for whatever reason someone is physically attracted to the 'wrong' sex, I think it would be better to have a happy relation with someone who feels the same way, than to be socially forced to have a relation in which at least one party and probably eventually both, are unhappy.

As Earfetish said, human behaviour is very complicated. Calling gays weakminded is cheap and easy. I don't know whether it's a personal choice or whether it's genetic, but I don't see why people should be prohibited from doing what makes them happy, if it doesn't harm anyone.

Of course, God didn't make us to be happy, but just to worship him, so I guess gays should just suck it up and pray extra hard to make up to god for the sinful abomination that they are. Even if it were something we were certain you were born with, which is not possible since it doesn't say that in the Bible so it can't be true, then I say God made them gay as a test for their devotion. If they surpass their temptation, they will be rewarded extra in heaven. It's not a cause for sinning and landing in hell, it's an opportunity for extra heavenly reward. It's the choice of giving in to the temptation that lands you in hell and deprives you of superduper heavenly awesome, not the fact that you would be born gay. But remember, love the sinner, hate the sin. God will give them their just punishment for being a sinful abomination, so we enlightened christians can just stand idly by and snicker. This is what makes us morally good.

[ABsoldier17]

At 3/13/08 10:47 AM, KingPaulP wrote: Homosexuality may vary well be to do with anatomical differences in the brain, the hypothalamus is smaller in male>female transexuals when compared to a male control group, there may very well be differences in some homosexuals as well, enviromental factors are also very important though.

The hypothalamus can be effected by outside factors. For example, if you lived a stressful prepubescent it affects the hypothalamus. It changes live the life style you live.

[ABsoldier17]

damn edit button!
*if you lived a stressful prepubescent LIFE it affects the hypothalamus*
*It changes WITH the life style you live*

[Drakim]

Thanks for the good replies.

And for the bad ones, from people like arcansi and ABsoldier17, learn to fucking read and think.

I was presenting a theoretical scenario. Do you know what that means?

It's like I say, "Imagine falling of a cliff. Now, what would you do on the way down?" and you'd respond, "HAH! I would never fall of a cliff!", missing the point completely.

In the original post, I said:

Would you still think homosexuality is sinful if we found out with complete certanly that you are born with it?

See? IF we found out that, I was wondering how you'd react.

[KingPaulP]

At 3/13/08 11:21 AM, ABsoldier17 wrote:

The hypothalamus can be effected by outside factors. For example, if you lived a stressful prepubescent it affects the hypothalamus. It changes live the life style you live.

Yes of course the hypothalamus is affected by stress, I really can't think of one part of the body that isn't, however there are already noted differences in the hypothalamus between the sexes from birth. I don't think it is theoretically possible for stress to affect homosexuality through the hypothalamus, as I can imagine being persecuted for your sexuality and possibly hiding it is a very stressful experience, using this theory you would be even more homosexual due to the stress.

[poxpower]

Damn, like 2 people out of 8-9 actually understood what the topic was about.

My guess would be that "it's the devil's gene" or some stupid bullshit like that which they pulled when people used their left hands.
Seriously, my MOTHER was in school with nuns and she was left-handed and they TIED HER HAND BEHIND HER BACK UNTIL SHE COULD WRITE WITH HER RIGHT ONE.

Religious people are BATSHIT INSANE. You can't predict how they'll react to anything logically because their entire life is based around complete stupidity and a book which very few have read often enough to the point where they can actually remember and analyze it properly.

Seriously, I read TONS of books as a kid, I remember barely anything from them, a christian is going to come and tell me he remembers everything from the bible? A giant dictionary-sized brick of poems and short stories? Fat fucking chance, and they show it every time by quoting an EXTREMELY small number of passages over and over and over again and ignoring basically 99.9% of the rest.

bricks have been shat. Good night.

At 3/13/08 10:23 AM, Earfetish wrote:

Everyone saying 'it's a choice, you can't be born with it, yadda yadda yadda' knows far less about this subject than eminent sexologists, and even they don't know. Probably a subtle combination of both nature and nurture, really, like you might be born being susceptible to fetishism but it took a few Bugs Bunny episodes to make you a furry.

There's no possible way that it's entirely genetic. Not a fucking chance in all of hell. Seriously there's some people out there who think they're getting hypnotized and probed by aliens, you're going to tell me that's genetic too? Fuck, people can be brought up to believe ANYTHING, and even worse: the REVERSE of everything you try to teach them.
A gay gene? How the fuck is that passed down with evolution? How did all the gay fish and lizards and mammals survive these millions and millions of years, passing down their genes every generation?
insane I tells ya. I don't even know why you're want there to be a gay gene other than if you're gay and feel like blaming it on something.

[Drakim]

At 3/13/08 12:26 PM, poxpower wrote: There's no possible way that it's entirely genetic. Not a fucking chance in all of hell. Seriously there's some people out there who think they're getting hypnotized and probed by aliens, you're going to tell me that's genetic too? Fuck, people can be brought up to believe ANYTHING, and even worse: the REVERSE of everything you try to teach them.

Well, my best guess for a gene possibility would be that there could be a gene that triggers it, not causes it.

A gay gene? How the fuck is that passed down with evolution? How did all the gay fish and lizards and mammals survive these millions and millions of years, passing down their genes every generation?
insane I tells ya. I don't even know why you're want there to be a gay gene other than if you're gay and feel like blaming it on something.

I used genes simply because the "gene pill" was easier for people to swallow than "hinder environment effect pill". It doesn't matter what causes it in my scenario, just that it isn't a choice.

[dySWN]

At 3/13/08 12:26 PM, poxpower wrote: Religious people are BATSHIT INSANE.

Generalizations FTL.

[SirLebowski]

I wish to ask, for the sake of being curious, how many people here with such bold opinions on the subject, are gay.

It's like a group of white people talking about how hard it is to be black.

In other words, if you aren't gay how the fuck do you know if it's a choice or a preference?

[xyzrobokiller]

I think it all has to do with hormones. Normally guys get a huge dose of testosterone and girls estrogen when they're adolescants, but each gets a small amount of the opposite as well. I guess if someone says they're gay its cause they got a slightly larger amount of the wrong hormone. This could very easily be caused by environmental factors, genetic mutations (dont say this doesnt happen unless you wanna say evolution is BS), or drugs/meds. Just throwing that out there

[Earfetish]

At 3/13/08 12:26 PM, poxpower wrote: There's no possible way that it's entirely genetic. Not a fucking chance in all of hell. Seriously there's some people out there who think they're getting hypnotized and probed by aliens, you're going to tell me that's genetic too? Fuck, people can be brought up to believe ANYTHING, and even worse: the REVERSE of everything you try to teach them.

I'd say there might be a combination of genes that can contribute to your likelihood of being gay.

A gay gene? How the fuck is that passed down with evolution? How did all the gay fish and lizards and mammals survive these millions and millions of years, passing down their genes every generation?

See it wouldn't be a 'gene', it'd be a group of genes that occasionally make someone more likely to be gay. It might be a side-effect from our desires to bond with males in hunter-gatherer communities, with there occasionally being someone who gets a surplus of male love.

insane I tells ya. I don't even know why you're want there to be a gay gene other than if you're gay and feel like blaming it on something.

I don't care either way, I would just be surprised if there wasn't anything biological that increased the chances of homosexuality occurring.

And as for 'blaming genes', or it being a 'choice', whatever my fetish might be (it isn't ears), I can look back as far into my memories and it's still always been there, even when I was prepubescent I always still had this fetish and have vivid memories of having such sexual fantasies when I was very little. So whatever warping happened to my sex drive happened way before I can possibly remember. I would be inclined to think, at birth, I was predisposed to this; I'm sure many people went through the mystery situation I went through when I was a toddler that triggered my fetishism, and very few would have gotten a life-long fetish out of it. And it's the same for gays. Whatever mysterious 'nurture' causes homosexuality probably doesn't make it happen in 100% of cases, indicating that biology plays some role too.

It is correct that every time I fantasise about my fetish, or encourage a girl to indulge me, it's my own personal 'choice', and I could 'choose' to blank it from my mind, deny my innate, life-long sexuality, and have a very boring and unfulfilled sex life. But it was never a choice to begin with - I was just lumped with a fetish before my memories start.

Exactly the same with homosexuality. Whether it's nature or nurture is irrelevant, because it's just as much a 'choice' as your accent.

Completely off topic, but then this topic has always been off topic.

[Earfetish]

I read some article once saying the mother's hormone level during pregnancy can alter the chances of the baby being born gay, but on googling I found this webpage:
http://www.viewzone.com/homosexual.html
written by someone who has correlated all the data on whether there's a genetic link to gayness or not

And to follow on about homosexuality and evolution, whatever percentage of people are homosexual (and most studies show it's constant), I betcha it's completely the perfect percent, finely tuned over millennia due to environmental pressures. Maybe it's halting evolution if you give birth to a gay kid, but maybe having a gay kid in your family's tribe gives you an edge over all the other tribes.

[SmilezRoyale]

It wouldn't matter to a Calvinist.

[MortifiedPenguins]

At 3/13/08 03:33 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote: It wouldn't matter to a Calvinist.

But they wouldn't know if they were saved or not.

Since, one can never know in the hands of an Angry God.

[SmilezRoyale]

At 3/13/08 03:35 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote:

At 3/13/08 03:33 PM, SmilezRoyale wrote: It wouldn't matter to a Calvinist.

But they wouldn't know if they were saved or not.

Since, one can never know in the hands of an Angry God.

Calvinism says people are damned or saved from the begining, but you can tell if they are or if they aren't by seeing how they live their lives. [Sort of the exact opposite of other mainstream churches who state that the way you live your life determines how you exist in the afterlife]

[KeithHybrid]

While I see where the OP is getting at, I still think homosexuality is a choice and not something one is born with. All sexually reproductive animals are naturally prone to being attracted to the opposite sex. It stands to reason that homosexuality is a choice to bypass one's natural sexual urges and switch them for another.

[Proteas]

At 3/13/08 09:20 AM, Drakim wrote: (this is aimed at Christians who thinks that homosexuality is sinful and that they should abstain from homosexual relations)

And that constitutes what percentage of people who frequent this forum?

Would you still think homosexuality is sinful if we found out with complete certanly that you are born with it, as opposed to choosing it?

As has been pointed out previously, the only scientific evidence that's been found thus is that of a study that showed differing sizes between the hypothalamus of a straight person to a gay person. That's it, and even then the jury is still out on whether this has any bearing on the matter.

But while we're on the subject, would you care to explain to me what evolutionary purpose having non-reproductive sexual relations with a member of your own sex has, or how it could be programmed into your genes?

From a Christian viewpoint, it wouldn't fit in with Yahweh making it possible to be born with a sexual orientation that causes you to sin and most likely be sent to hell.

Actually, the Christian viewpoint is that we are all born into sin and must ask God for forgiveness of our sinful nature. We recognize that we are born with a spiritual handicap and must find our way toward God in order to purified of our sin, and then it's up to us to learn self control to keep from sinning again.

Also, if we alongside with the disscovery that homosexuality is something you are born with, we could also block the gene that causes it, with a pill that the mother can take to hinder it from developing, would you support it?

You know, for something so theoretically "natural," I find it odd that I've never heard this anti-gay pill as being proposed by so Christians.

[Earfetish]

At 3/13/08 04:46 PM, KeithHybrid wrote: While I see where the OP is getting at, I still think homosexuality is a choice and not something one is born with. All sexually reproductive animals are naturally prone to being attracted to the opposite sex. It stands to reason that homosexuality is a choice to bypass one's natural sexual urges and switch them for another.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuali ty_in_animals

[Drakim]

At 3/13/08 04:47 PM, Proteas wrote:

At 3/13/08 09:20 AM, Drakim wrote: (this is aimed at Christians who thinks that homosexuality is sinful and that they should abstain from homosexual relations)

And that constitutes what percentage of people who frequent this forum?

I don't know. That was why I specified it right at the start of the post. What should I have done differently?

Would you still think homosexuality is sinful if we found out with complete certanly that you are born with it, as opposed to choosing it?

As has been pointed out previously, the only scientific evidence that's been found thus is that of a study that showed differing sizes between the hypothalamus of a straight person to a gay person. That's it, and even then the jury is still out on whether this has any bearing on the matter.

But while we're on the subject, would you care to explain to me what evolutionary purpose having non-reproductive sexual relations with a member of your own sex has, or how it could be programmed into your genes?

I can't believe it. Proteas, you are supposed to be one of the smart ones here. Why do you go with the general mass and say stupid things? D:

This is a fake scenario. As in, make believe. I am simply asking, "If homosexuality was proven to be part of a person from birth, how would you react?", and people keep shooting "OMG HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PROVE IT?".

That isn't part of the point. It's like asking you what you would do in your last moments alive, and you keep complaining over the question because you can't imagine something that could kill you. I AM SIMPLY NOT ASKING ABOUT THAT PART.

I am wondering how Christians would deal with homosexuality being a natural thing, like left handed. I am not saying that it is natural, or that we should think it's natural, or anything of the kind.

What I am doing, presenting a theoretical question, is something very common, and it's easy to understand. However, it seems that a lot of people are too fired up about homosexuality being wrong that they can't even think clearly about something as simple as this.

From a Christian viewpoint, it wouldn't fit in with Yahweh making it possible to be born with a sexual orientation that causes you to sin and most likely be sent to hell.

Actually, the Christian viewpoint is that we are all born into sin and must ask God for forgiveness of our sinful nature. We recognize that we are born with a spiritual handicap and must find our way toward God in order to purified of our sin, and then it's up to us to learn self control to keep from sinning again.

So, being gay and asking for Jesus forgiveness, while knowing you will continue living gay, isn't diffrent from being a liar, asking for Jesus forgiveness knowing you will lie again in the future?

Also, if we alongside with the disscovery that homosexuality is something you are born with, we could also block the gene that causes it, with a pill that the mother can take to hinder it from developing, would you support it?

You know, for something so theoretically "natural," I find it odd that I've never heard this anti-gay pill as being proposed by so Christians.

What? this "anti-gay pill" doesn't exist. It was something I came up with as part of my theoretical scenario.

[Professor-D-Weed]

At 3/13/08 09:20 AM, Drakim wrote: (this is aimed at Christians who thinks that homosexuality is sinful and that they should abstain from homosexual relations)

Well, since I don't believe that being a homosexual is sinful, I'll just watch this topic to see what happens.

Since all of us are created in the image and likeness of God, I always try my best not to judge people, not to press my beliefs on other people like some Jehovah's Witness kind of guy, nor do I question someone's sexuality and whatnot.

[KingsHighway]

Of course, God didn't make us to be happy, but just to worship him, so I guess gays should just suck it up and pray extra hard to make up to god for the sinful abomination that they are. Even if it were something we were certain you were born with, which is not possible since it doesn't say that in the Bible so it can't be true, then I say God made them gay as a test for their devotion. If they surpass their temptation, they will be rewarded extra in heaven. It's not a cause for sinning and landing in hell, it's an opportunity for extra heavenly reward. It's the choice of giving in to the temptation that lands you in hell and deprives you of superduper heavenly awesome, not the fact that you would be born gay. But remember, love the sinner, hate the sin. God will give them their just punishment for being a sinful abomination, so we enlightened christians can just stand idly by and snicker. This is what makes us morally good.

Now i just find that offensive. Secondly to the thread starter, lighten up, this thread is to express all thoughts opinions and ideas on the matter, sorry if it isn't going the way you hoped.
I Believe Gaydom (less of a better word) is a choice. I mean a gay gene, Bull de los Shit. You NEVER see any animals . . . but humping (For less of a better word, again). Think back to 20 years ago. There were only two gay people, little richard and . . . someone else . . . gimme a sec . . . oh well forget it.
If there was a such thing as a gay gene, and they did create an Anti-Gay pill (Titled Show-Tune begone) I'd have nothing to do with it. Our individuality is what makes us human (Probably already stated).

[Proteas]

At 3/13/08 05:26 PM, Drakim wrote: What should I have done differently?

You posed a hypothetical scenario to a group of people who don't frequent this forum, or don't do so in a large enough number as to be considered representative of their faith. On top of that, parameters given for this scenario largely revolve around pigeon-holing said believers into contradicting their own expressed belief system in order to give you the answer you want; that they are wrong in your own eyes and that their beliefs are invalidated.

This is a fake scenario. As in, make believe. I am simply asking, "If homosexuality was proven to be part of a person from birth, how would you react?", and people keep shooting "OMG HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PROVE IT?".

We don't belong to the group of people you wrote this scenario out for, what obligation do we have to play along with this scenario?

So, being gay and asking for Jesus forgiveness, while knowing you will continue living gay, isn't diffrent from being a liar, asking for Jesus forgiveness knowing you will lie again in the future?

The idea is to become a better person by limiting how often you sin, and getting to the point where you sin no more.

What? this "anti-gay pill" doesn't exist. It was something I came up with as part of my theoretical scenario.

The "anti-gay pill" idea is not one that is original to you, it has been debated on here before and has made it to talking heads in the media. My question was why is it that I've seen more atheist/agnostic/non religious folk touting such a drug as a solution to the "problem" of homosexuality than I have seen religious folk doing such, which is to make an allusion to the idea that maybe folks like yourself are the intolerant bigots around here.

In short; Christians aren't ones to hate gay people, just the act itself, while you're the ones proposing a medical advancement to eradicate them entirely in utero before they even have the chance to chose for themselves. Or so has been my experience with the subject.

[Professor-D-Weed]

At 3/13/08 05:57 PM, KingsHighway wrote: Now i just find that offensive. Secondly to the thread starter, lighten up, this thread is to express all thoughts opinions and ideas on the matter, sorry if it isn't going the way you hoped.
I Believe Gaydom (less of a better word) is a choice. I mean a gay gene, Bull de los Shit. You NEVER see any animals . . . but humping (For less of a better word, again). Think back to 20 years ago. There were only two gay people, little richard and . . . someone else . . . gimme a sec . . . oh well forget it.
If there was a such thing as a gay gene, and they did create an Anti-Gay pill (Titled Show-Tune begone) I'd have nothing to do with it. Our individuality is what makes us human (Probably already stated).

And to add to this, yes, some animals can exhibit homosexual acts, its quited disturbing to see actually. Overall, its kind of disturbing to see heterosexual animals to mate too. :-\