5,580
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 1:
Line 1: − + − Why in the world would it be necessary to defend or justify something that is part of nature, something people (and other species) are born to? The answer to that is threefold: a). Some social conservatives use the bible to justify discrimination and intolerance against gay people. This is the case even though we did not all agree to be ruled by the bible, that the bible says different things about homosexuality (the Eunuchs shal inherit the earth), and that much of what is in the bible doesn't fit in a modern world (hence we don't smite people for mixing fibres in their garments, burn a sacrificial bull at the altar, condone slavery, or stone people for the 'abomination' of eating shellfish). b) Some social conservatives use twisted science to condemn gay and lesbian people, even forgetting that women are included, and looking only at so-called 'research', such as the discredited ex-gay ministry, which reinforces their belief systems. c). Those same social conservatives actually CAUSE homosexuality to be a critique of 'traditional values' (although there is NOTHING non-traditional about homosexuality in and of itself-- it's been around since before tradition!) by pushing homosexuality into the shadows by using the bible and twisted science to advocate for discrimination and intolerance against gay and lesbian people. There is nothing new about wanting to abridge the rights of people we are not comfortable with, and there's a self-reinforcing dynamic of systematic mistreatment of people who are different, leading to defensive behavior, leading to stereotypes, which are used to justify further mistreatment. There is also nothing new about blaming a group of people we are uncomfortable with for all society's ills. It's reassuring and provides a simple answer-- even if it's the wrong answer. Alexxjm − −
Debate:Are there any elements of choice, when it comes to carrying out homosexual acts? (view source)
Revision as of 21:15, November 27, 2007
, 21:15, November 27, 2007Undo revision 343823 by Special:Contributions/Alexxjm (User talk:Alexxjm) please don't spam the same content to multiple pages -- contribute to each page separately
{The very title of this "debate" slants the dialogue in a negative direction.
{{debate}}
{debate}}
''Are homosexuals "born that way"? Would it outrage their personhood to suppress the desire to fornicate with a member of the same sex?''
''Are homosexuals "born that way"? Would it outrage their personhood to suppress the desire to fornicate with a member of the same sex?''