Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

Because homosexuality doesn't actually hurt anyone. The only reason it would need treatment is if it were actually harming anyone. The violent-nature thing, thus, doesn't apply, because someone with a violent nature causes harm to others, while homosexuality does not. A religious belief is not a valid reason to re-educate an entire class of people.

_________________
beep beep I'm a Jeep

But you didn't answer my question, you said why you think that it doesn't need to be treated. I asked why it couldn't be treated. As far as the question of whether or not homosexuality is an ethical behavior or not is a completely seperate issue.

_________________

Well, yeah. Everything in this world has been tainted with sin. We are inherently tainted as well as soon as we're concieved, which is what causes us to sin. We've been that way since the Fall. Adam and Eve weren't tainted at Creation but became so as sson as they made the choice to disobey God. If we weren't tainted, then we wouldn't sin at all in our lifetime. And really, do you think that anyone would choose not to sin? I mean, I've sinned. I admit that. So has everyone else who's ever lived.





They're hurting themselves, by getting STDs, which could then spread to others through sexual contact.

Well, anybody can get an STD. The fact that gay people can too does not mean that they are any more sinful than a straight person who gets an STD. Gay people aren't the source of STDs.



I'm sure, if you wanted to, you could ship gay people off to a re-education camp, like North Korea used on American prisoners of war in the '50s to brainwash them into thinking they were straight, but how could we do something like that? And why would we want to?

Gay people don't need to be "treated", because what they are is not a disease.

_________________
beep beep I'm a Jeep

I can't see how that's any different from anyone else. Are you saying that only gay people get STDs? I sure hope not...

Oh, definetly not! I'm just saying, as seamusz said earlier that homosexuals get more STDs that heterosexuals.

Man, you sure are ignorant.

_________________

Because homosexuality isn't a "behavior" any more than, say, being Hispanic is a behavior.

Once again, let's go back to the medical and psychiatric community (emphasis mine):

_________________

It's probably possible to "cure" it with hypnotism (sp?), as many habbits and things can be cured with hypnotism. I'm not saying homosexuality needs to be cured, or that it's a habbit, but it's probably possible.

Rather than try and mesh myself into this already complex discussion, I'll just say this: I am perhaps the only pure-straight person in my circle of good friends, and that's perfectly OK with me. I like all my friends for who they are. I like most people for who they are. Their sexual orientation has never hurt me, and in many ways I feel it's been an aide: Male friends with whom I can discuss relationships with males! And femininity in general. It's quite nice. When it comes to my opinions on just about anything, I am quite fond of a Wiccan maxim: "And it harm none, do as you will." I believe that we should always try to seek tolerance and acceptance first, of anything, or just tolerance if acceptance can't be reached. I do not know of a single incident where earnest kindness has done great, irreprable harm. (Of course I am not all-knowing, so if you know of such an incident, please feel free to inform me.)

Kindness is my philosophy of life. I do believe in karma, or the idea of "what goes around comes around," and that if we are good, whoever or whatever watches over us (I'm not fully spiritually settled, but I'm slowly coming to my own conclusions through my own experiences and peculiarities) will be good to us, and that He/She/It/They mostly wants for us to treat each other (and the world) well.

I suppose, before I depart, I will leave with a provocative comment I read. An author commented in his biography that he believed that, if Jesus were to return to earth, that he would be crucified (or the modern-day equivalent, whatever that may be) by the exact same sort of bigots who crucified him the first time, and for the same reason. In the name of relegion.

Maybe this is a presumptuous question to ask, but I suppose I'll ask it anyway and duck the fallout. Some people believe that homosexuality is wrong because God says it's wrong. OK. But why does God believe it's wrong?

_________________
You look like you need a hug.
*hug*
There, now don't you feel better?

That's a funny question, the only real answer to which is "because he can." What I want to know is, in this God-thinks-homosexuality-is-wrong scenario, did god create homosexuals (or willfully allow them to come into existence) and then decide homosexuality is wrong, or did he decide it was wrong and then create homosexuals (or willfully allow them to come into existence)?

_________________

Homosexuals are perverts. (really??????????) They ABSOLUTELY shouldn't make those marches. They promote pervertness

Imagine that everyo0ne in the world are homosexuals. Mankind would then be extinct.

_________________
Resistance is futile if <1 ohm.

InterruptorJones

Interesting question on free will there. Firstly, as God is eternal, isn't constrained by linear time, and is all-knowing, I guess that he realised that people can choose to be homoseual. I certainly think that God dosen't create homosexuals - others may disagree, but commiting a homosexual act is a conscious choice. Note that God has no problem with men loving one another as long as it is not physical (e.g. David and Jonathan).

So, back to your question, God willfully allows people to become homosexuals because that's their choice - it wouldn't be much of a world if God struck down everyone with bolts of lightning. We'd all get the idea soon enough and there goes freedom of choice. The point is if you have gay tendencies then God says you can work on yourself and become a different person - if you pass the test it's all the more to your credit.

In the end though, the Torah makes it clear that although homosexual acts are bad, only Jews have the commandment not to commit them. Judaism has always been and always will be a small race of people; its obvious that being homosexual is not good for population renewal!

Zoophiles are discriminated too. Why aren't they allowed to marry their favorite animals? FIGHT FOR YER LAWS!

_________________
Resistance is futile if <1 ohm.

Um, no, they can't. Homosexuality isn't a choice. We've been over this before. Skip back a few pages. Not a choice.



Ah, now I see the nature of your misunderstanding. Yes, committing a "homosexual act" is a choice, but homosexuality has nothing to do with about committing homosexual acts (if that were the case, then every person who ever got drunk and--well, you know the rest of the scenario--would be homosexual); homosexuality is about being homosexual, not doing homosexual things. You could be born in a cage and never touch another human being (well, except your mum; that part is pretty much required) and still be homosexual. You could be the only man in a colony of women and live there your whole life and still be homosexual.

Have you ever actually, er, talked to a homosexual person before? You might want to run your line of reasoning by an actual gay person sometime. It might be fun.



JudgeDeadd, spammers and trolls get banned from the forums pretty quickly these days. If you want to participate in this discussion, you're going to have to make a meaningful contribution; if you're not prepared to do that, please leave.

_________________

Nah. Despite the fact that you seem pretty convinced I just don't accept your premise there. Firstly, I haven't seen evidence of a homosexual gene as yet. Secondly I've had personal experience - a few years ago I had homosexual feelings which lasted a good couple of years. Because of my beliefs I didn't pursue these feelings and eventually they left and I was attracted to girls again. You may say that I wasn't a proper homosexual then, but I don't think you have the right to judge me like that. I just wanted to not have certain thoughts and after a while (with God's help in my opinion) they went away.

I have don't have a problem with people being homosexual (and I believe they really are gay, not just mistaken), just don't feed me the line "it's just the way they are" because I believe that the human mind is stronger than that. I'm not going to insult their intelligence and ask them "have you thought about going straight?", but I believe that if you really want to be straight you can be, and not just being straight whilst really longing to be gay.

These are just points of views anyway without any strong evidence, so you can't convince me and I can't convince you. I'm pretty sure that our holding these views isn't hurting anyone so lets just agree to disagree on this one. I just hope that you realise how one can reconcile believing in a God that is against homosexual acts, and homosexuals existing.

PS: Reading back though the posts I note that What's Her Face said
Now there's a narrowminded opinion that your line of reasoning can lead to.

Not to be snarky, but that, I guess, is the difference between you and the medical and psychiatric communities.

_________________

You're seriously telling me that the whole of the medical and psychiatric communities are united in telling me that coz I was once gay it's weird that I dig women now. You find me a quack on your side, I'll find you a quack on mine. By the way, can I also add that in no way do I consider homosexuality an illness, more a state of mind.

Being religious I believe that science hasn't explained everything about the human mind quite yet. Psychiatric opinions change every five years anyway, or do they all believe that Fraud was totally correct still?

No, I'm not telling you that.

_________________

I don't really want to get deeply into this, but I'm soo tired of reading that "every reputable scientist and psychiatrist has agreed that homosexual people can never be heterosexual."



From what I read, there is no way to change somebody's orientation against their own wishes. Parents cannot send a kid off to a program to straighten them out. However, if that person wants to be straight, recent studies by prominant researchers do show that they have the ability to achieve that goal.

Interesting article, racer_x. Where are you quoting from? At first I was very interested, and was about to suggest you add the info to Wikipedia, but upon checking out the footnotes I became pretty dubious.

While Spitzer sounds like a respectable guy, and while his study had some interesting results, it doesn't seem to my untrained and biased mind very conclusive. He did phone interviews with a very small sample of people who, if not converted from homo- to heterosexual, were very motivated to appear that way. I'm not saying this invalidates his research, but it does lessen its authority somewhat.

I couldn't find anything about the Wright/Cummings book except on very political web sites, many of which point to the NARTH SITE, and my local library doesn't have it. Sounds interesting, though.

And then there's NARTH. This is an organization I don't think I'll touch with a ten-foot pole. "On May 17, 1997 NARTH published the results of a two year study involving 860 clients and 200 psychologists and therapists. Mainstream psychological associations called the study 'heavily biased', because each of the therapists supplied data only on their 'success stories'." [1] If only we could all report only our successes and none of our failures.

_________________

The section is from a book review of a religious book by a few educated people, though I don't really know much about them: A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D., MBA, MPH; Shirley E. Cox, DSW, LCSW; and Jeffrey W. Robinson, Ph.D. The authors of the article may have a bias, based on my guess to their religious affiliation. However, they seemed (to my biased and untrained mind) to be very educated in this field and aquainted with research and studies by researchers with a variety of biases.

One reason I'm not bothered by the "success" stories problem with either the study or the book is that neither I nor the authors of the article are trying to describe every person with homosexual attraction or homosexual orientation. They are only publicising the fact that there are examples of people who have changed from one to the other. I'm not saying that there are millions, or that "anyone can do it with just a bit of desire and willpower." I'm just saying that it has happened and does happen.

Just one little thing I noticed... In regards to the Spitzer research, you stated one of your problems with it was the small sample size. In the article you linked to about the research, one of the strengths it mentioned was the good sample size.

Also: link to the article. If you follow the link, be prepared as the book and the article are aimed at the LDS community.

Sigh. I had written up a nice reply, racer_x, and then my stupid toe hit the stupid button on my stupid UPS. Ugh.

Now I've totally lost my will to write it over again. Suffice it to say, though I'm still unconvinced (big surprise, I'm sure), your points are valid and give me a good starting point to learn more (if only seamusz had dug up this sort of stuff in that other conversaiton of ours).

_________________

Whats the point IJ? I don't think that having the backing of psychiatrists that sleep on their left side validate your opinions, so why should I expect you to feel the point of view of psychiatrists that sleep on their right side to validates my point of view? It doesn't matter how many times I reason my position through with you, you just end up saying something like "yes, but homosexuality is like being tall, so you're wrong".

The one thing that I can't understand about those on the "liberal side" is how unwilling they are to be understanding of the convictions, standards, and opinions that come from a religious belief. But they expect us to appreciate their pov's that stem from the science of humanity and a non-existance of God. It's like they can't even pretend that God may actually exist long enough to see how I might be justified in the opinions that I have.

_________________

Heres my honist opinion:

It's just wrong, it ain't natural, and if everyone way a 'homosexual' then we would have no kids.

Go straights and bi's!

_________________

You know that you can state your opinion without being offensive, right?

_________________

I think you're the only one here who judges professionals based on which side they "sleep on" rather than their actual methods, professional history, and body of work. There might be some evil liberals that would say, "This guy's research agrees supports conservatives' views, so it must be bunk," but I am not such a person. If the science holds up, then the science holds up, even if that means I have to reevaluate my beliefs. racer_x actually provided some science that holds up, which has, albeit in a small way, caused me to reevaluate my beliefs. You could have done the same, but chose not to.

_________________

*sigh* Your ignorance is showing...

_________________

Well you're a real source of knowledge, aren't you. Funky let me give you a little food for thought: We're all gay. It just matters to what degree that you are gay.

_________________

Jello B and BTG: Don't feed the trolls.

_________________