Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
ExChristian.Net Open Forums > Rants & Replies > Homosexuals And Bi Sexuals ?
Posted by: me! May 24 2004, 08:43 PM
hi ..
been a long time since i have posted here but i have been reading regularly though ..
ne ways .. i was having this argument over same sex marriges with this realy hardcore christaion fanatcin grl .. and i was trying to convence her that homosesuals and bi sexuals are ppl too .. they have sexual desirs and needs as an other individual . so i dont think we should stop anybody to live or choose a way of life they want as long as they don't break the law and a re good citizens....
i was telling her that its not there fault that they are " gays( in her words)" they were made like this and thye couldn't do anything abt it ..
but she kept on insisting that its their fault ..
they wern't made like this they chose to be like that ....and she was realy confident abt it ..
my question is..
it that true ..?????are homosexuals and bi sexuals not like that form birth ?? do they themselves choose to live like this ??
sorry for bad grammer !!
Posted by: Baby Eater May 24 2004, 08:49 PM
"Me!", did you chose to be heterosexual?
You don't need to answer.
Posted by: Baby Eater May 24 2004, 08:59 PM
On a side note I believe the "It's not their fault" piety crap is insulting to homosexuals.
I may also add some stats...
SO, do you think homosexuals choose their sexual orientation? I guess they would choose otherwise if the could, seeing those stats (from my sex ed/STD prevention/world religion/everything that didn't fit elsewhere/etc. class):
40% of successful suicides are due to homosexuality (from... errr... what the english term... human right commision?)
30% of gays are considered alcoolics
25% gays becomes itinerants
75% of gay or lesbian students suffer negative reactions at school.
76% homsexual teens fear the moment they will reveal their homosexuality to their parents.
Yeah, big choice.
ps: yeah I have the sources
Posted by: Tocis May 24 2004, 09:00 PM
I second BE's remark.
The only "choice" available is to live in celibacy (for everyone), or to prefer one gender over another (for bisexuals).
The cases where homosexuals become celibate or bisexuals are convinced to only become involved with opposite-sex partners are sold by the fundies as examples of "healed sinners".
Homosexuality always is easy to condemn... we humans tend to find sexual practices different from the ones we like disgusting. Combine this with the fundies' need to present The Enemy™ and you know why, among all the groups of people that can be considered sinners based on the babble, the non-heteros are the primary enemy.
Posted by: Luck Mermaid May 24 2004, 09:05 PM
What makes you think we'd know the answer? We're not exactly a pride board. But in my opinion, yes I do find it ridiculous and annoying for people to say 'it's not their fault'. It makes gays and lesbians and transgendereds seem like poor crippled freaks who must be pitied. And I'll be damned if I'm gonna sit by and watch people be compared to criples. Stupid crippled bastards. No, seriously though, you know what I mean.
Also the 'choice' ofbeing lesbian or straight is rather ridiculous - yeah, I choose to be harassed and scared every day of my life depending on where I live, and to never know if I'm going to find true love, and to be surrounded by people who tell me ot hate myself and have to be secretive and depressed. I do it because I want to fit in and seem cool. Sigh... I think whoever says this could take a tip from 'mom of nine' their thinking is equally miswired.
Posted by: Quicksand May 24 2004, 09:18 PM
i dont really care what the fuck you're orientation is. str8 bi gay do you kill people do you shove grandma in the street do you oppress and hurt other people? those are the questions i most care to ask about a person. whether you are gay or whatever, who the fuck really cares. choose it born with it...so what.
only fundiexians and homophobes want a good ass fucking that they can't admit !
Posted by: me! May 24 2004, 09:19 PM
i didnt mean to say it to hurt somebody .
but when ur talkin to these hardcore christans the only way you can make them listen to u is to make them feel like u r one of them ..
and then plant the "seed" in their head about what u think abt it ..
sorry if i have hurt some body .......
i don't think that being homosexual or bisexual is anything bad....
but when ur talkin to ppl like the 1 i was talking to .. u have to come down a lil to make them usderstand what u r tryin 2 say ..
otherwise they would say that u r a hell bound non-beliver and will go to hell .. end of conversation ..
hope u understand what i m sayying ..
it was just a question .. i never wanted to insult anybody ...
sorry .. its proably my english or my choice or words thats messingg things up !!
BTW.. i asked this question to have a better argument with her the next time i see her ...
Baby Eater <-- i would really love to see those sources ur talking bat .. again not to question ur knowldegs but to have some kinds proof with me next time i have n argument with her !!
thanks!
Posted by: Ender May 24 2004, 10:03 PM
QUOTE (me! @ May 24 2004, 08:43 PM)
are homosexuals and bi sexuals not like that form birth ??
I'm no expert on this topic but as far as I know no one knows for sure what makes someone attracted to the same or opposite sex.
As with most attributes homosexuality or sexuality in general are probably determined by a combination of genetics and environment.
Posted by: formerfundie May 24 2004, 10:16 PM
QUOTE (Baby Eater @ May 24 2004, 08:49 PM)
"Me!", did you chose to be heterosexual?
You don't need to answer.
I really like and appreciate this answer Baby Eater. I wish more people would think like that.
FF
Posted by: chrome May 24 2004, 10:57 PM
QUOTE (me! @ May 24 2004, 10:19 PM)
and then plant the "seed" in their head about what u think abt it ..
You're talkin' my language baby! Planting a "seed" is a very good thing. Especially when dealing with irrational and illogical individuals.
Okay, my answer:
Is it a choice? Yes and no. The no part... I have always known I was gay, there has never been a doubt in my head. Regardless of what others think, or how I saw other gays treated, I knew I would never be anything other than my true self, gay.
The yes part... the choice is, are you willing as an individual to come out of the closet and be the person you are (read: gay)? Or are you going to make the choice to deny your true self and "play" straight your whole life, living in misery. And if you decide to "play" straight are you going to marry someone of the opposite gender? And do you think you have the right to deprive your spouse of the heterosexual love the they deserve so that you can "play" it straight.
The choice is which fear do you give in to. The fear of coming out of the closet and being subjected to societies reaction to the gay community? Or the fear of living a lie your whole life and always being terrified that "someone" will find out. Not to mention the perpetual unhappiness you must suffer.
So it is a choice, but only a choice to be your True Self as opposed to choosing to live an unhappy, loveless existence.
------------------------------------
Coming out of the closet for the GLBT community is very similar to revealing something very personal to someone you respect. The fear of rejection and ridicule are a very high possibility. Perhaps your father was a minister, would you be afraid to tell him you were an Athiest? You are are an Athiest, but the fear of revealing your True Self is there.
I'm glad you asked the question me!, smart people always ask. Knowledge is the only thing that no one can steal from you.
A site you might find useful is religioustolerance.org
Posted by: Lokmer May 25 2004, 02:56 AM
Not that I'm an authority, but human sexual psychology has been a hobby for years, and I have always had a decent number of homo/bisexual people around me. What follows is a lay opinion based on research and experience, so for what it's worth...
It seems that sexual preference and orientation is determined by a number of factors interacting, some genetic, some enviornmental, and some volitional. Psychoneurology and genetics haven't progressed to the point where you can give a difinitive answer as to whether or not someone is "born gay." It seems to me likely that there are some that ARE genetically homosexual, if for no other reason than every statistical analysis I've ever read pegs the homosexually-gravitating population at between 1 and 6%, across cultures. But human sexuality is not a black and white issue by any stretch. Although I hate to concede the point to the Religious Right (notice the caps), sexual preferences are trainable and fetishizable, and conditioning impacts neurochemistry as much as genetics does. Such conditioning to fetish can be the result of conscious choice or of environmental pressures or of a combination between the two. I have never met a person that has chosen to be gay in the sense that a morlist would use the word ("free moral choice"), or any other orientation for that matter. I have known and known of people who have been conditioned from being generally bisexual to preferring one gender or another, I have known people who were "theraputic lesbians" (women who gravitated toward other women for a time due to an emotional need or an acquired aversion to men, but who later became "straight" again). I've known lifelong homosexuals who knew that they preferred their own gender from birth, and kink homosexuals who enjoyed thier own gender simply because they thought it was naughty. And every conceivable variation in between. Sexuality is a lot more fluid and complex and effected by far more factors than is generally acknowledged by the political dogmas of the day, whether those dogmas come from GLAAD or Focus on the Family. Of course, your fundy-leaning friend isn't going to like an answer like that, because it implies (hell, it outright screams) that her sexual-moral paradigm is woefully shallow. To really do sexual ethics, you have to move far beyond questions like "who has what organ in which orifice." You have to get into serious and fairly radical relational ethics that are wont to vary from situation to situation and person to person.
I don't quite know if I got anywhere near your question, but I hope that was relevant in at least an indirect fashion.
-Lokmer
Posted by: Vixentrox May 25 2004, 04:23 AM
I think some of the numbers may be skewed too by the pressure not to admit, even to themselves that they are not heterosexual. It's a difficult thing for many people to come to grips with when they realize they are different than the percieve norm. It took me years to admit to myself that I was Bi. I'm still not open about it due to work, family and society pressures. I'm not sure that I'll ever be truely open about.
Posted by: Ganeshya May 25 2004, 04:56 AM
My area of academic study is all that hormaone/biology/psychology stuff.
As I understand it, the research on being gay - nture/nuture is saying that at some critical stage during the pregnancy the baby's brain is being bathed in hormones that have a slightly different balance.
So, it is not a decison that the person makes. BUT it is not genetic either. You willnot find the "homosexual genes"!
The best description is to say that it is physiological. A good book to read is Marton Seligman's "What you can change and what you can't". Published in 1996.
Posted by: biggles7268 May 25 2004, 05:46 AM
Damn I wish i could find the link but i read a really good article with a theory on it.
I tried to remember enough to write it down but I can't, it was really good though.
Posted by: Madame M May 25 2004, 06:03 AM
Well, all I know is that my nephew was wrapping himself in sheets and dancing around on his toes from a young age- like 5. He asked for all my and my sister's old barbies to play with when he was about 6 or 7. When he got into his teens he admitted to having a crush on Brad Pitt, got picked on alot at school and played dress up princess computer games with my daughter. Him and his mother have a reem of "chick flicks" that they quote from often. Fortunately, he never committed suicide even though he has the asshole law enforcement macho to the core stepdad who doesn't like any of that "sissy stuff". When he finally "came out" the night before he left home, she wasn't shocked but was still upset. But it's not like we didn't know from about age 4 or 5 it was kind of obvious. So I would say that it was not a choice, but the way he was born. Just my observation.
Posted by: AggieNostic May 25 2004, 09:53 AM
QUOTE (me! @ May 24 2004, 11:43 PM)
i was telling her that its not there fault that they are " gays( in her words)" they were made like this and thye couldn't do anything abt it ..
but she kept on insisting that its their fault ..
they wern't made like this they chose to be like that ....and she was realy confident abt it ..
The certainty and confidence of Fundamentalists is entirely unfounded. No one anywhere in the world can possibly know 10% of the things Fundies pretend to know for certain -- like where you are going to spend eternity.
As far as the Nurture versus Nature debate on homosexuality, I always come back to the question of: What teenager in his right mind would choose to get his ass kicked every day in school for being gay ... rather than choosing to be straight and accepted?
Also, lest your Fundy friend forget, Fundies have been "confident" and certain about a great many things ... that humanist thinking has overcome.
For example, many Fundies believed that slavery was biblical. Many Fundies thought that women should not receive painkillers during labor since it was God's will that women feel the pain caused by Original Sin. Fundamentalists were the biggest supporters of segregation (they don't call it the Bible Belt for nothing).
Heck, Bob Jones University only recently got rid of its rules against interracial dating. The Southern Baptists finally got around to apologizing for their role in suppressing the rights of minorities.
Based on that, you'd think Fundies would temper their "confidence" with a little humility. Instead, they continue to work towards denying basic rights to people because they believe their holy book tells them to do so.
Posted by: MrSpooky May 25 2004, 10:23 AM
Tee hee. I think the word "mansex" is funny. ^___^
Posted by: mandylibra1979 May 25 2004, 10:35 AM
me!
I know that you did not mean to offend anyone so don't worry. I also know how difficult it is to talk with some people (fundie Christians) about subjects like homosexuality.
I think that Chrome explained it best.
I, myself am heterosexual although I have had several experiences with women. I could easily be a lesbian but I have chosen to live a straight life since I feel more inclined to be with a man.
I feel that a person's sexuality regardless of whether they are homosexual, heterosexual or somewhere in the middle is affected by many factors . . . genetics, the environment in which they live and also personal choice just to name a few.
as always
mandy
Posted by: fuct> May 25 2004, 10:56 AM
I really think these homo-bashers are secretly gay themselves. My own mother doesnt want me to hang around
homosexuals because she thinks they'll "turn me gay"
I really dont give a shit if you're gay,straight,hermaphrodite,
or whatever if youre a good person youre a good person,who
cares what your "sexual orientation" is.
Posted by: Madame M May 25 2004, 11:41 AM
QUOTE
I really think these homo-bashers are secretly gay themselves.
Maybe some of the extreme ones, the ones who actively will physically hurt or kill, or go out of their way to verbally abuse gay people. I think most people "homo-bashers" are just conditioned to hate. When I was 18, so that is a good 13 years ago, I remember watching an Oprah show on lesbians and I felt so angry that I wanted to bash the tv. Not because I was a secret lesbian or anything like that, but because I had been conditioned my whole life to feel that homosexuals are evil, controlled by satan and have an agenda to destroy the nation, families, morality..etc. So my reaction was a knee-jerk reaction to years of conditioning. In church, homosexuality is always lumped in with the most heinous crimes. When something goes wrong in the nation, the pastor will bring up God's judgement on Sodom and Gomorrah and how He is looking down and seeing all the abortions, homosexuality..etc, and prepared to wreak another destructive judgement on the US. So you begin to think, when you hear this stuff over and over, that the homosexuals are the cause of destroying the US. I was reading an article recently that said that homosexuality was a communist conspiracy to bring down the birth rates, destroy the family and keep people in a constant state of selfish immaturity. People tend to hate what they don't understand or think will affect them negatively in some way. It's all mental conditioning. In church, fundies are constantly hearing homosexuality mentioned only in a negative light. It is listed among the worst sins, the causes behind disasters...etc. What started turning my perception around was getting a job and working directly under a gay man who thought me his best employee and we became friends.
Posted by: MrSpooky May 25 2004, 11:47 AM
Reaction formation. Taking a strong opposing view because you secretly harbor this negative trait yourself.
The fifth of Freud's psychological defenses.
Posted by: fuct> May 25 2004, 11:59 AM
QUOTE (Madame M @ May 25 2004, 11:41 AM)
QUOTE
I really think these homo-bashers are secretly gay themselves.
Maybe some of the extreme ones, the ones who actively will physically hurt or kill, or go out of their way to verbally abuse gay people. I think most people "homo-bashers" are just conditioned to hate. When I was 18, so that is a good 13 years ago, I remember watching an Oprah show on lesbians and I felt so angry that I wanted to bash the tv. Not because I was a secret lesbian or anything like that, but because I had been conditioned my whole life to feel that homosexuals are evil, controlled by satan and have an agenda to destroy the nation, families, morality..etc. So my reaction was a knee-jerk reaction to years of conditioning. In church, homosexuality is always lumped in with the most heinous crimes. When something goes wrong in the nation, the pastor will bring up God's judgement on Sodom and Gomorrah and how He is looking down and seeing all the abortions, homosexuality..etc, and prepared to wreak another destructive judgement on the US. So you begin to think, when you hear this stuff over and over, that the homosexuals are the cause of destroying the US. I was reading an article recently that said that homosexuality was a communist conspiracy to bring down the birth rates, destroy the family and keep people in a constant state of selfish immaturity. People tend to hate what they don't understand or think will affect them negatively in some way. It's all mental conditioning. In church, fundies are constantly hearing homosexuality mentioned only in a negative light. It is listed among the worst sins, the causes behind disasters...etc. What started turning my perception around was getting a job and working directly under a gay man who thought me his best employee and we became friends.
I completely agree with you.
BTW- I was half-kidding. I should've put an emoticon after the "homo-basher" comment.
Posted by: Ender May 25 2004, 12:27 PM
QUOTE (fuct> @ May 25 2004, 10:56 AM)
I really think these homo-bashers are secretly gay themselves.
It seems to me that the people who are the most comfortable with themselves and are secure in their heterosexuality are the ones who seem the least threatened by homosexuality.
But as Madame M pointed out, not every one who hates homosexuals hates them because they aren't secure in their own identity.
Posted by: BlueGiant May 25 2004, 12:28 PM
Maybe it came from gorwing up where I took an immense amount of crap from my so-called peers (they sure didn't act it). Maybe it is my nature to look at the mechanics, with an emotional response being secondary...Maybe it was just because I myself am gay (though that took me a while to figure out, being a young workaholic has its disadvatages). I never could get galled about the "perverts."
I could, however get real good and pissed at "bashers" of any kind. I can tolerate a lot, but some things just swamp it.
me!, from my own experience, it wasn't a choice. Admittedly, it took me longer than average to figure out what the hell was going on, that I did indeed like guys, and actually admit that I was decidedly not straight. You love who you love, you don't generally have a say in the matter (IMHO) Some days I still wish that I was straight, just seems easier in a way. I won't howeverr, lie to myself to make that any easier. It is hard to shave when you can't look at yourself in the mirror, 'ya know.
As for the comment about "playing" it straight. This is something form the LGBT(QRSTUVWX...) communuity that also pisses me off. Though I love guys, I behave in a very straight manner, more because I am an unabashed geek than anything else. The fact that I don't fit the stereotype, combined with a bit of natural shyness around people I find attractive, makes the s.o. thing very difficult to acheive. Some days it's like I'm a part of both worlds, more days, I belong nowhere, the outlier that everyone wishes it didn't exist.
Posted by: fuct> May 25 2004, 01:08 PM
Are you "playing it straight" or are you just being yourself?
Not all gay dudes speak with a lisp and have good fashion sense.
Posted by: Ender May 25 2004, 02:01 PM
QUOTE (fuct> @ May 25 2004, 01:08 PM)
Are you "playing it straight" or are you just being yourself?
Not all gay dudes speak with a lisp and have good fashion sense.
Posted by: TruthWarrior May 25 2004, 02:38 PM
People are born omnisexual. Humans will fuck anything (trees, the ground, animals, plastic) and they'll love anything that will love them back.
One can aquire a taste to anything sexually, and change whenever they want to another. It's the love part that's complex though. So many factors with love.
Posted by: MrSpooky May 25 2004, 02:57 PM
There actually have been studies that showed that those who were most adamantly homophobic tended to be the most aroused by gay porn.
Posted by: PriorWorrier May 25 2004, 03:10 PM
QUOTE (TruthWarrior @ May 25 2004, 02:38 PM)
People are born omnisexual. Humans will fuck anything (trees, the ground, animals, plastic) and they'll love anything that will love them back.
One can aquire a taste to anything sexually, and change whenever they want to another. It's the love part that's complex though. So many factors with love.
Case in point from http://anwary-islam.com/life/men_wonem_fast.htm. Sorry, i was trying to research a prior post about semen in the tomb and came across this. The rules are spelled out pretty clearly for Muslims.
QUOTE
6 : If one rubs his sexual organ with a dead-body or an animal and semen is discharged, then compensatory fast will be compulsory but recompensation will not be due.
11: If anyone kissed an animal and it caused discharge of semen, then fast was not disrupted.
13: If the vagina of an animal is rubbed with hand and it causes seminal discharge, the the fast will not be disrupted.
16: if anyone commits sexual intercourse with an animal or a dead-body or committed sexual intercourse outside the vagina and it caused no seminal discharge, then the fast is not disrupted. But if there is seminal discharge in such conditions, then the fast will be disrupted and a compensatory fast will be due on him, but recompensation will not be due.
25: if a man pour some medicine into his penis or does so with a syringe, then the fast is not disrupted, provided the liquid poured inside the penis does not reach the bladder.
26: If a person performs enema with oil or reach oil inside his nose or pours it into his ears, then his fast is disrupted, but expiation is not due. If the person himself does not perform enema but anybody else does so with him, then also his fast it disrupted, and expiation is not due.
Posted by: Tanz May 25 2004, 04:50 PM
QUOTE (fuct> @ May 25 2004, 10:56 AM)
My own mother doesnt want me to hang around
homosexuals because she thinks they'll "turn me gay"
You know, that's actually a very common belief in the older generation. They believe people turn gay in order to 'get more sex'.
But seriously, I believe that if you're gay, that's simply the way your brain was wired. There are certain traits to women that I'm specifically attracted to and simply can't explain why. Therefore, it's not that big a stretch to think that some men's brains are wired so that they're just turned on by other guys.
Fundies use the Bible to make gay people into subhuman, making it easier to hate them. That makes them different and 'not one of us.'
Posted by: chrome May 25 2004, 09:32 PM
QUOTE (BlueGiant @ May 25 2004, 01:28 PM)
As for the comment about "playing" it straight. This is something form the LGBT(QRSTUVWX...) communuity that also pisses me off.
Blue, I know what you are saying, but I think you may have misunderstood my comment on the matter. I did not mean playing it straight in the sense of how you act in public, I meant it in the sense of pretending to be a heterosexual. Denying the fact that you are gay, marrying someone of the opposite gender and living the rest of your life like that. Like a straight couple (or as a straight couple). When in reality you are gay and should accept that fact, instead of marrying someone and taking away the possibility of them ever finding the love they deserve.
Too many gays and lesbians take the cop out route because they are terrified of being open about themselves and accepting of who they are. I have, my whole life, watched individuals do this. And the mental anguish that is caused by this choice is horrible.
My advice to anyone (regardless of your sexuality), is always be your true self. The amount of happiness you gain from it outweighs the immediate discomfort 100 fold. And the only proof you get of that is to be your true self.
Posted by: phoenix May 26 2004, 12:44 PM
reading through these posts makes me happy to live where i am. i've run across very few homophobes (and those would be the hard-core christians). we have the lesbian couple, the gay guy (who does theatre work and gets featured in the paper all the time due to his incredible art), students that are openly gay or bi.
my boyfriend like to wear a skirt sometimes (he's hetero), and other than a few snide comments, most people in the town didn't seem to really care.
...
Posted by: ericf May 26 2004, 03:43 PM
You are lucky. My area tends to be openly hostile to homosexuals.
There... now this post won't be completely off topic.
QUOTE
back in my day we had to code our own drivers... uphill... both ways! -- ericf
Yay, I made someones sig file. There are so many people to thank: my mother, my familiy... oh yes, of course, SATAN.
Posted by: me! May 26 2004, 05:07 PM
actually down here in houston its not that bad....
there was this grl in my english class who openly used to say that she was lesbian and almost everybody was fine with it !!
but i know of a guy who is constantly being picked on by the fo0tball players of our school just coz' he's gay....
i feel sorry for him...
Posted by: PseudoGod May 26 2004, 07:14 PM
QUOTE (me! @ May 24 2004, 08:43 PM)
but she kept on insisting that its their fault ..
they wern't made like this they chose to be like that ....and she was realy confident abt it ..
Sorry for saying so, but your friend sounds like a real dolt. And I normally give people the benefit of the doubt, but when people presume to speak with confidence and/or authority (as you say your friend does) on a subject they know absolutely nothing about and obviously haven't thought through logically, I need to make sure they know they are idiots.
Here is my scientific wild ass guess on this: If someone says they chose to be gay then they did. If someone says they didn't choose to be gay they didn't. Guess I don't see what people aren't getting here....
Posted by: spidermonkey May 26 2004, 08:18 PM
QUOTE (Tanz @ May 25 2004, 08:50 PM)
But seriously, I believe that if you're gay, that's simply the way your brain was wired. There are certain traits to women that I'm specifically attracted to and simply can't explain why. Therefore, it's not that big a stretch to think that some men's brains are wired so that they're just turned on by other guys.
Fundies use the Bible to make gay people into subhuman, making it easier to hate them. That makes them different and 'not one of us.'
I feel the same way about men. (I'm female, btw) I don't remember choosing to like men; there are just certain things about dudes that I like that I can't explain.
What if I had those same deep and unexplainable feelings about women? Hmmm....guess fundies would just LOVE that one....
Posted by: SpaceFalcon2001 May 26 2004, 08:28 PM
Gay people choose to be that way for whatever reason. It's their choice. They have that right to choose how to act.
Posted by: PseudoGod May 26 2004, 09:12 PM
QUOTE (SpaceFalcon2001 @ May 26 2004, 08:28 PM)
Gay people choose to be that way for whatever reason. It's their choice. They have that right to choose how to act.
And you know this by experience?
Posted by: Stargazer May 26 2004, 09:26 PM
I personally think it's sad that we can't accept people for who they are. My parents and brother are both homophobic, though I'm not (never have been, even while I was still a Christian) - as far as I myself am concerned, they are people just like the rest of us, and therefore deserve the same level of respect.
Just my two cents *shrug*
Posted by: BlueGiant May 27 2004, 01:33 AM
It is apparent to me that "gayness" (i.e. the condition of being homosexual), and straightness for that matter, is a polygenic system, that is it has multiple causes. There may be genetic, molecular and biochemical components, but they are probably not the be-all-end-all. This is shown by simple inheritance patterns. This cannot be exclusively genetic, as it is quite non-Mendellian. There are probably (and from my POV, obviously) enviornmental factors involved. This, I think, is not going to shock anyone around here. Now, while there is not a Mendellian inheritance pattern, there are indicaors that there are components of this on the molecular/genetic level. These would be that there are some inheritance paterns, as well as genetic markers found in embryonic animals (recent Duke study, too lazy to pull the refrence), and help demonstrate this point. There are similar conditions in humans that exhibit these kinds of features, the first comming to my mind being clubfoot (I'll be happy to contribute information on that disease if requested). All of this probably happens early in development.
The point being: even if it is not deterministicly encoded in the genome, the combination of factors achieve the result that the determination of orientation is not a choice. It is just how human sexuality develops (and with a 90% heterosexual rate, lowball, it is pretty good for perpetuating the species).
It is not a predisposition, it is not a choice, it just is. The choice is only in whether one is willing to lie to the world and themselves, or to be true to themselves and everyone else. This puts homoexual persons in a rather lousy position in the Xtian paradigm, they have no choice but to live by sin, either by being honest about who they are. love, and their expression of that love, or to make their life a perpetual lie, equally wrong in their system.
I wonder why no one has dropped that on them?
I hope this has been helpful to the discussion. And before I forget, my pertinent creds: BA Chemistry from Northwestern University, my prior work is in biochemistry in electrron transport and moleular biology research in the field of apoptosis. Information on the nature of polygenic disorders come with discussions with my mother who is a pediatric orthopedic surgeon.
And if you read all that, thanks, I know it was a bit dry.
Posted by: TexasFreethinker May 27 2004, 02:15 AM
The typical fundy black and white world is not grounded in reality.
There are too many variables to be able to support a statement "gay people choose that lifestyle".
Firstly, human sexuality is not as simple as straight or gay. There is a continuum of positions and several different characteristics to consider such as sexual attraction, gender identification, and sexual behavior. Some of these can be controlled by an individual and some cannot.
True, most people have a great deal of control over who they have sex with, or if they have sex at all. However it is not healthy in the long run for a person to try to behave in a way that's contrary to their sexual wiring. And, it's not fair to the partner in a commited relationship if the person they're with doesn't really have the attraction to them that they're being led to believe is there.
Only an irrational moral code (such as the ones fundies follow) would require a person to lie to themselves and others to conform to a mandated sexual orientation when their orientation is different. A proper moral code would stress personal and interrelational honesty and would support any sexual relationships between informed and consenting adults.
Posted by: humanwill May 27 2004, 11:28 AM
now you know that if religion never came into the scene people probably woudn't see being gay as abnormal, subhuman, immoral, wrong, etc etc....
it's religion that came along and said man should only lay with woman, etc....
pleasure is pleasure baby... our bodies are designed to enjoy it... no matter who, what, when, where and how you get it...
why deny yourself an existance and prohibit pleasure just because religious fanatics see it as wrong and abnormal...
i refuse to see gay people as wrong or abnormal, pisses me off because it always stems back to being linked to religious paranoia and superstitions....
Posted by: AggieNostic May 27 2004, 12:16 PM
QUOTE (SpaceFalcon2001 @ May 26 2004, 11:28 PM)
Gay people choose to be that way for whatever reason. It's their choice. They have that right to choose how to act.
For the sake of an argument, let us suppose that gay people did choose what gender they gravitated towards. Then what? Would it then be okay to beat the shit out of them? To make fun of them? Etc.
And, please explain to us why a teenager would choose to get his ass kicked every day by the football team rather than choose to be straight? Your assertion does not hold water.
Posted by: AggieNostic May 27 2004, 12:19 PM
QUOTE (TexasFreethinker @ May 27 2004, 05:15 AM)
Only an irrational moral code (such as the ones fundies follow) would require a person to lie to themselves and others to conform to a mandated sexual orientation when their orientation is different.
"It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime. He takes up the trade of a priest for the sake of gain, and in order to qualify himself for that trade, he begins with a perjury. Can we conceive any thing more destructive to morality than this?" --http://www.themilitantagnostic.ws/heroes/thomas_paine.html
Posted by: Luck Mermaid May 27 2004, 08:51 PM
QUOTE
Gay people choose to be that way for whatever reason. It's their choice. They have that right to choose how to act.
Sure they do, just like I choose to be female. You know I didn't naturally have a vagina upon birth - oh no, I had no crotch at all - all time and space just disappeared. It was only later on in life that I decided I would choose to be a girl, and a vagina magically sprouted. Like a chia pet.
Kind of like I chose to be brown skinned. When I was born, I was clear. Everyone on tv was telling me I should be white - but I was rebellious, so I changed my skin to brown!
You know if I wasn't accustomed to a civil dialogue with you, I'd net slap you. Now. Alot.
Posted by: Luck Mermaid May 27 2004, 08:52 PM
Fuckhead.
Posted by: Cerise May 27 2004, 09:00 PM
QUOTE (SpaceFalcon2001 @ May 26 2004, 08:28 PM)
Gay people choose to be that way for whatever reason. It's their choice. They have that right to choose how to act.
Just like you chose to be ignorant and make this comment?
Posted by: Tocis May 27 2004, 10:15 PM
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am under the impression that some of you didn't read the whole of the passage you start discussing. Just in case I'm not wholly wrong about that, please re-examine:
QUOTE
Gay people choose to be that way for whatever reason. It's their choice. They have that right to choose how to act.
I'd say that this is the choice the OP meant... not a choice of sexuality, but a choice of how to live that sexuality.
Just my $ 0.02
Posted by: Cerise May 27 2004, 10:39 PM
Oh I read the whole passage Tocis. And it may well be that the second half was what he actually meant. If so, I do hope he'll tell us so I can stop thinking nasty thoughts about his parentage.
But the first half of it, i.e. the part that goes:
QUOTE
Gay people choose to be that way for whatever reason.
There's a big difference between "being" and "acting". Almost as big a difference as leaving out the "some" at the beginning of the sentence, "black people are poor".
Just my ha'penny.
Posted by: BlueGiant May 27 2004, 10:45 PM
Well, parentage aside, he is right in the choice in how to act on ones impulses/urges/whatever. As for who you are attracted to, I think he missed the boat. Could you clarify?
Posted by: Tocis May 27 2004, 10:48 PM
QUOTE (Cerise @ May 27 2004, 10:39 PM)
There's a big difference between "being" and "acting". Almost as big a difference as leaving out the "some" at the beginning of the sentence, "black people are poor".
I admit you have a point there. Hope SF will clarify that...
Posted by: me! May 28 2004, 12:21 AM
what do u ppl mean by " enviormental factors"
do u mean that the enviorment u live in plays an imp part in determining ur sexual desires?
can u plz explain th e" enviormental factors" a lil ??
Posted by: Kaiser Soze May 28 2004, 01:14 AM
Well, I realised that i was Bi-sexual, if "realised" is the appropriate word at the age of fifteen. I'd known for a time that, unlike most of my male peers, I was able to appreciate beauty in the male form. I don't remember making a conscious decision to do so. Certainly it came as something of a revelation (not a particularly profound one, but a revelation nonetheless) when i was able to apply the label of "bi-sexuality" to these emotions, but not one I decided arbitrarily: "Oh, I know, I'll define myself as bi-sexual. That sounds like fun."
I agree with the perspective that it is far too narrow and simplistic to assign the development of homosexuality/bi-sexuality to any one factor (i.e, genetic, environmental, etc) and that it is a major failing on behalf of modern psychological research that we continue to do so. I don't repetend that being a practicing bi-sexual male gives me any particular insight into how or why homosexuality occurs (and, just on a personal note, I'd like to add that unlike the pre-conceptions fostered by biblical perspectives I do not regard my bi-sexuality as in some way derogatory or degrading. All it means to me is that I get to have a helluvalot more fun than most) however, I and those other homosexual/bi-sexual members of the board can speak from personal experience, unlike those forming abstract arguments based upon some pre-conception or "idea" of the notion.
Posted by: Luck Mermaid May 28 2004, 05:25 AM
QUOTE
I'd say that this is the choice the OP meant... not a choice of sexuality, but a choice of how to live that sexuality.
Just my $ 0.02
.
He's one of them!! BURN HIM!!!
Seriously though, what difference does it make if you 'choose ' to be gay or 'choose to act out on your sexuality and have a normal sex life instead of screwing someone you're not into or chopping off your clitdick to be pure?
Posted by: Lokmer May 28 2004, 10:01 AM
QUOTE (me! @ May 28 2004, 01:21 AM)
what do u ppl mean by " enviormental factors"
do u mean that the enviorment u live in plays an imp part in determining ur sexual desires?
can u plz explain th e" enviormental factors" a lil ??
"Environmental factors" is a bit of a catch-all term, it means anything non-genetic, which includes:
Fetal hormones
post-natal hormones
drugs
conditioning
culture
family
parenting
etc.
etc.
etc.
In answer to your other questions, yes, I'm saying that the environment you live in plays a part in determining sexual desires. Not an exclusive part, mind you, and, like I said, "environment" is a bit of a cheat, because it encompases a wide range of complex interactions, stimuli, and biochemical doohickies.
Anyway, I hope that helps
-Lokmer
P.S. Big thanks to Fwee for alerting me to me!'s reply
Posted by: Disco Stu May 28 2004, 01:13 PM
What does it matter? As long as people are ethical and honest who cares about their sexual orientation. Remmeber judge ye and ye shall not be judged
Posted by: chrome May 28 2004, 07:59 PM
QUOTE (Tocis @ May 27 2004, 11:15 PM)
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am under the impression that some of you didn't read the whole of the passage you start discussing. Just in case I'm not wholly wrong about that, please re-examine:
QUOTE
Gay people choose to be that way for whatever reason. It's their choice. They have that right to choose how to act.
I'd say that this is the choice the OP meant... not a choice of sexuality, but a choice of how to live that sexuality.
Just my $ 0.02
I think I have to agree with Tocis here. That is how I read it as well. True, the FIRST time I read it I went "What????", but then I read it again.
I hope SF comes back to the thread to clarify though.
Posted by: chrome May 28 2004, 08:09 PM
QUOTE (Lokmer @ May 28 2004, 11:01 AM)
QUOTE (me! @ May 28 2004, 01:21 AM)
what do u ppl mean by " enviormental factors"
do u mean that the enviorment u live in plays an imp part in determining ur sexual desires?
can u plz explain th e" enviormental factors" a lil ??
"Environmental factors" is a bit of a catch-all term, it means anything non-genetic, which includes:
Fetal hormones
post-natal hormones
drugs
conditioning
culture
family
parenting
etc.
etc.
etc.
I kind of want to expand on what Lokmer said with an example.
Think of the one thing that REALLY turns you on about the person you are attracted to (male or female). It could be anything from personality to huge tits. There is always something.
Now try to trace down why that particular thing/trait turns you on so much. Your answer to that question will explain a lot about sexuality and why we are attracted to who we are attracted to. This would be more of an environmental cause.
You could make the argument that the gender you are attracted to is a fetish.
Fetish
2. An object of unreasonably excessive attention or reverence: made a fetish of punctuality.
3. Something, such as a material object or a nonsexual part of the body, that arouses sexual desire and may become necessary for sexual gratification.
4. An abnormally obsessive preoccupation or attachment; a fixation.
Posted by: Tocis May 28 2004, 08:14 PM
QUOTE (Luck Mermaid @ May 28 2004, 05:25 AM)
He's one of them!! BURN HIM!!!
Oh good - it's f*cking cold here this morning. 3 ° C at the end of May, go figure!
QUOTE
Seriously though, what difference does it make if you 'choose ' to be gay or 'choose to act out on your sexuality and have a normal sex life instead of screwing someone you're not into or chopping off your clitdick to be pure?
Well, "not acting homosexually" at least is a choice, contrary to "you choose to be homosexual". Don't get me wrong though, it's not a choice to be forced on anyone.
Posted by: Luck Mermaid May 28 2004, 09:46 PM
I think it's a stupid choice, people try and force it on others, now they're saying 'oh, ok, being gay ISNT a choice' because they already look like fucking fools so they're saying 'oh, you shouldn't ACT on your feelings.'
Yes, you can live a life not giving in to any of your sexual urges or forming a relationship with someone you care about. I could also chop off my arm. Hey - it's a CHOICE, dude!
Posted by: Tocis May 29 2004, 03:26 AM
Quite right.
Posted by: I Broke Free May 29 2004, 06:08 AM
I see I missed a very interesting thread. I was away for a few days visiting Montreal, Quebec with my partner and got home late yesterday.
Before I put in my two cents I want to tell you about the highlight of our trip. We were visiting the gay section of the city (St. Catherine Street) for the afternoon. It was a beautiful day and we decided to sit and have some coffee at a sidewalk cafe. Two women that appeared to be in their late 50's were sitting next to us and we engaged them in conversation. (One from each couple was bi-lingual) It turned out they had been together for 36 years. A few months back when the province of Quebec legalized gay marriage, one of the women proposed to the other and they were married soon afterward. They beamed with pride as they told us of the ceremony and how much it meant to them.
So there we were, the four us on this beautiful spring day, sipping coffee watching the crowds walk by. The sun was bright, and thousands of Maple seeds were falling like little helicopters from the trees along the street. I looked at this couple chattering away in French (I don't speak a word) and thought just how right this all felt. I was so happy for them both.
Do we choose our dreams?
I ask this because I was wondering how people who insist that gays have a choice in the matter of their sexual orientation can answer this question. I have NEVER had a sexual dream that was not exclusively about men. Even before I understood what a sexual dream was or even discovered masturbation my sexual fantasies were exclusively homosexual. I do not believe I had any control over this. Would anyone disagree with me?
Posted by: Madame M May 29 2004, 07:17 AM
QUOTE
This puts homoexual persons in a rather lousy position in the Xtian paradigm, they have no choice but to live by sin, either by being honest about who they are. love, and their expression of that love, or to make their life a perpetual lie, equally wrong in their system.
I read something on a more liberal christian site once, in which they said that it was not "homosexuality" that is a sin, but "homosexual sex". Therefore, the Christian homosexual will remain celebate- his/her cross to bear for Christ. It makes no sense to me why anyone cares what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes.
Posted by: I Broke Free May 29 2004, 08:19 AM
QUOTE (Madame M @ May 29 2004, 11:17 AM)
Therefore, the Christian homosexual will remain celebate- his/her cross to bear for Christ.
And to be fair a heterosexual divorcee has the same obligation, yet after many postings to this effect on Christian Forums, no one will respond????
Posted by: Luck Mermaid May 29 2004, 01:34 PM
too busy cramming their oral shitholes with lobster and oysters.
Posted by: chrome May 30 2004, 12:27 AM
QUOTE (I BROKE FREE @ May 29 2004, 07:08 AM)
Do we choose our dreams?
I ask this because I was wondering how people who insist that gays have a choice in the matter of their sexual orientation can answer this question. I have NEVER had a sexual dream that was not exclusively about men. Even before I understood what a sexual dream was or even discovered masturbation my sexual fantasies were exclusively homosexual. I do not believe I had any control over this. Would anyone disagree with me?
Although my opinion is quite biased, I would not disagree at all.
I always knew I was gay, even when I had no idea what it was called. I never imagined a partner not being male.
I love and respect women a great deal, but I knew I was destined to spend my life with a man.
Posted by: Lokmer May 30 2004, 03:11 AM
A thought from my book on Christians and Art (written before my deconversion):
"It is interesting to note that in today's church, the practice of serial marriage and divorce is nearly universally accepted, although it was explicitly condemned by Christ, while polygamy, which has at various times been endorsed and enforced by God, is nearly universally reviled as perverse and immoral; while homosexuality is held up as the worst of all, despite only a handful of ambiguous references in scripture. Apparently our blind acceptance of inherited values as "Christian" extends far beyond our choices in entertainment."
I should add, for clarification, that it's been many years since I thought that either divorce or homosexuality were moral issues in themselves. As with all things, it's how you conduct yourself in the situation you find yourself in: i.e. do you treat others involved with dignity and grace?
-Lokmer
Posted by: PseudoGod May 31 2004, 08:50 PM
QUOTE (Madame M @ May 29 2004, 07:17 AM)
It makes no sense to me why anyone cares what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes.
I can tell you why Madame, it is because Biblegod is absolutely, unequivocally, obsessed with what human males do with their penis. The evidence is right there in the Bible.... some of Biblegod's most violent and deadly killing sprees were instigated because some people were using their penis too much. The thought of people actually acting on the sexual feelings that god instilled in humans engrages Biblegod so much, he won't hesitate to turn entire cities into a complete bloodbaths, killing all senior citizens, children and babies in his frenzy to "get even" with his creations. So, I think many Christians are only following by example, by taking on the same obsession with sex that their god demonstrates. This is why gay marriages draws more attention than even babies getting their heads blown off or americans being decapitated in the Middle East, because it is more important to Biblegod. I am sure it is also why so many Christians are currently afraid the gay marriage thing is going to bring on another sodom and gomorrah style slaughter by Biblegod. They are worried that his obsession with the male penis will once again have him so enraged and boiling with anger and wrath that he will be set off on yet another uncontrollable murderous temper tantrum, possibly wiping out most, if not all of the united states.
The real question is: Why do people think that a god, supposedly so intelligent that it created the universe and everything in it, would be so totally fixated on the male penis, and then worship that god? Doesn't that seem really, really bizairre?
Posted by: Lokmer May 31 2004, 09:36 PM
QUOTE (PseudoGod @ May 31 2004, 09:50 PM)
The real question is: Why do people think that a god, supposedly so intelligent that it created the universe and everything in it, would be so totally fixated on the male penis, and then worship that god? Doesn't that seem really, really bizairre?
PseudoGod, I've never thought of it in quite that light before, but you're right - there's a lot about it that smacks of a phallic cult. From the stone monuments being built in the patriarchal period, to some of the more bizarre purity laws, to circumcision, and on and on.
Thanks for opening the door to a new insight.
-Lokmer
Posted by: PseudoGod May 31 2004, 11:08 PM
Lokmer,
I guess what led me to that conclusion was that the writers of the Bible were men, and the God of the OT has a very male personality.....he is a warrior, quick to judge, quick to anger, vengeful, controlling, sexist, jealous and primitive. All very male qualities. Back in those days I can only imagine sex was not well understood, it was probably a touchy subject viewed with some fear and trepidation, and the men considered their women "theirs" and probably guarded them jealously. Thus explaining Biblegods fixation on sex sin and his anger and rage when people were doing it too much or were too open about it. And, most of the time when the Bible talks about sexual sin it refers to males or men, so I get the feeling the Bible was written by men, about a male god, for men, because men considered themselves the top of the food chain. To me this is just more evidence that man created God, not the other way around. It seems natural that when these primitive men created Biblegod in their image that his personality would be reflective of their own primitive male personalities, not of an all-knowing, all-intelligent being, that would presumably be asexual, and more worried about its creations murdering each other in it's name (whether it be Jesus, Allah, Vishnu, etc.) than who its creations were sleeping with, to the point of destroying cities and killing its creations over it. It always sounds kind of funny when I hear Christians say that Biblegod has only holy perfect qualities. Where do they get that from???
Posted by: Lokmer May 31 2004, 11:47 PM
QUOTE (PseudoGod @ Jun 1 2004, 12:08 AM)
It always sounds kind of funny when I hear Christians say that Biblegod has only holy perfect qualities. Where do they get that from???
They get the idea from the later prophets (Isaiah, etc.) and from the general religious drift of the mid-to-late 1st millenium BCE (there's no way to tell whether it was syncretism or cultural evolution, but whatever it was effected the entire Levant and ancient near-east and far-east). Within a couple of hundred years, Zoroastrianism, high monotheism in Judaism, Greek idealism, Buddhism, and Hindu metaphorical thought all emerged with this idea that "God" is not a strictly anthropomorphic or totemic being, but is something ineffable and infinite beyond the grasp of the mere human mind (Egyptian monotheism emerged about 700-1000 years earlier, but it was very short-lived as a major cultural force). The idea isn't found in the earlier pagan myths that populate the early O.T., but is instead found in the prophets, aprocrypha, and some of the N.T. Part of this move towards high monotheism was the emergence of the doctrine of the divine Logos - the creative force that was the Word or the Name of the universe itself (concept originates with Plato in Greece, with Hermeticism in Egypt, etc.). This also is a concept that is common throughout the old world. The homily/hymn that opens the gospel of John is just the most recent iteration of a theme going back centuries - and in some cases millenia - before it.
Hope that helps ::
-Lokmer
Posted by: I Broke Free Jun 1 2004, 06:50 AM
QUOTE (PseudoGod @ Jun 1 2004, 03:08 AM)
Lokmer,
I guess what led me to that conclusion was that the writers of the Bible were men, and the God of the OT has a very male personality.....he is a warrior, quick to judge, quick to anger, vengeful, controlling, sexist, jealous and primitive. All very male qualities. Back in those days I can only imagine sex was not well understood, it was probably a touchy subject viewed with some fear and trepidation, and the men considered their women "theirs" and probably guarded them jealously. Thus explaining Biblegods fixation on sex sin and his anger and rage when people were doing it too much or were too open about it. And, most of the time when the Bible talks about sexual sin it refers to males or men, so I get the feeling the Bible was written by men, about a male god, for men, because men considered themselves the top of the food chain. To me this is just more evidence that man created God, not the other way around. It seems natural that when these primitive men created Biblegod in their image that his personality would be reflective of their own primitive male personalities, not of an all-knowing, all-intelligent being, that would presumably be asexual, and more worried about its creations murdering each other in it's name (whether it be Jesus, Allah, Vishnu, etc.) than who its creations were sleeping with, to the point of destroying cities and killing its creations over it. It always sounds kind of funny when I hear Christians say that Biblegod has only holy perfect qualities. Where do they get that from???
Pseudo God:
I don't think I could ever get any of my Christian friends to agree with your insights, but I must admit that it ALL rings very true to me. Thank you.
Posted by: Reach Jun 1 2004, 07:54 AM
QUOTE (I BROKE FREE @ May 29 2004, 09:08 AM)
Do we choose our dreams?
I ask this because I was wondering how people who insist that gays have a choice in the matter of their sexual orientation can answer this question. I have NEVER had a sexual dream that was not exclusively about men... I do not believe I had any control over this. Would anyone disagree with me?
Same here, IBF. I have NEVER had a sexual dream that was not exclusively about a man and me.
As far as I know I've never chosen a dream yet. I've tried. If I could choose my dreams, I would. I'd exclude a few nightmares for starters.
Posted by: PseudoGod Jun 1 2004, 09:09 AM
Lokmer, thanks for the info. If only they could see how god evolves with culture
.IBF, if any Christian admitted to agreeing with any of what I wrote I would fall over backward in my chair, lol. Although my dad (a very devout fundy) did at least admit that in the OT god "probably" had to "come down to the level of primitive man" and "take on some male qualities" so the men at that time could relate to him. Still doesn't explain why an all-intelligent being needs to kill babies and kids because some adults had an overacitve libido
Posted by: formerfundie Jun 1 2004, 10:46 PM
QUOTE (PseudoGod @ Jun 1 2004, 09:09 AM)
Still doesn't explain why an all-intelligent being needs to kill babies and kids because some adults had an overacitve libido
Especially since this "all knowing" "all powerful" "ever-present", yadayadayada....'god' supposedly created that labido in the first place!
FF
Posted by: mandylibra1979 Jun 2 2004, 08:43 AM
I feel that there are many factors that affect a person's sexuality . . . genetics, choice, etc. It doesn't matter to me if homosexuals choose their sexuality or are born homosexual.
I feel that both are possible and probable. Either way it should not matter because they should be treated with the same respect as everyone else.
By the way, I don't think that SF meant to be disrespectful.
Posted by: Baby Eater Jun 2 2004, 12:41 PM
QUOTE
Lokmer,
I guess what led me to that conclusion was that the writers of the Bible were men, and the God of the OT has a very male personality.....he is a warrior, quick to judge, quick to anger, vengeful, controlling, sexist, jealous and primitive. All very male qualities. Back in those days I can only imagine sex was not well understood, it was probably a touchy subject viewed with some fear and trepidation, and the men considered their women "theirs" and probably guarded them jealously. Thus explaining Biblegods fixation on sex sin and his anger and rage when people were doing it too much or were too open about it. And, most of the time when the Bible talks about sexual sin it refers to males or men, so I get the feeling the Bible was written by men, about a male god, for men, because men considered themselves the top of the food chain. To me this is just more evidence that man created God, not the other way around. It seems natural that when these primitive men created Biblegod in their image that his personality would be reflective of their own primitive male personalities, not of an all-knowing, all-intelligent being, that would presumably be asexual, and more worried about its creations murdering each other in it's name (whether it be Jesus, Allah, Vishnu, etc.) than who its creations were sleeping with, to the point of destroying cities and killing its creations over it. It always sounds kind of funny when I hear Christians say that Biblegod has only holy perfect qualities. Where do they get that from???
Indeed, one of the 3985673 evidences supporting my/our position.
What is sad is that some people will look at this book as some divine object of holy wisdom...
There are such real masterpieces of wisdom of ancient times out there! The OT is a piece of foolish bullshit.
Posted by: PseudoGod Jun 2 2004, 03:49 PM
QUOTE (Baby Eater @ Jun 2 2004, 12:41 PM)
What is sad is that some people will look at this book as some divine object of holy wisdom...
There are such real masterpieces of wisdom of ancient times out there! The OT is a piece of foolish bullshit.
I agree. I think the problem alot of people have (which was my problem as a Christian) is that they don't read the whole Bible. In fact I remember i