Talk:Mystery:Why do people choose homosexuality?

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

I'm not sure how name-changing is done, but this should probably be called Mystery:Why do...., unless it's converted to an article, eg. "Why people choose homosexuality." Good info in any case. RodWeathers 17:06, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Actually, I was just adding, this bit:

Can someone put the "Mystery:" tag in front of this?
Also, if anyone has any ideas or can add to what I wrote, please do. I feel my guesses do not give sufficient reason for anyone to be ignorant enough to actually make this choice.

I realized that I didn't have a mystery tag out front. Good eye. JANorton 17:07, 22 November 2008 (EST)

Ug, quote box, fixed JANorton 17:08, 22 November 2008 (EST)

There's a whole series of things that I would like to say, and I'll be the first to admit that they're not all so kind, but with justification. You guys surely are narrow-minded when it comes to homosexuals. There are SO many things I could say about it. First of all, theatre is not a GAY people thing; it's a people thing. I'm the only gay kid in my theatre group *gasp*. Excuse me? People choose to be gay because of PEER PRESSURE? That is the... That's the most ridiculous argument from Conservatives I've heard EVER! The true peer pressure is kids choosing to pretend to be straight so they can be 'cool' and 'normal' and a 'good Christian.' Oh yes, and let's mention that.

Homosexuality is called an abomination, that's true. But think about the context of that specific scripture. What else was said? "Thou shalt stone your children when they are disobedient." "Thou shalt stone adulterers." "Thou shalt not eat shellfish." If Jesus disagreed with these laws, what makes homosexuality any different? Just because you FEAR it? Just because you're so cruel and selfish to act so arrogantly, as if your view of the Bible is flawless? The word of the Bible is perfect, but your interpretations of it are not. http://www.soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible-gay-christian Read this for more information.

I'm a gay Christian, a Christian. I believe Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior with my entire spirit. I praise and worship Him, and repent for my sins. I follow Him so dearly, in ways you would be skeptical believe, because I'm just some "Homosexual recruiter looking to make all boys gay and use them just for sex. I'm just some faggot boy who chose to be gay for attention." If you think homosexuality is a choice, try it! Sure, you could go to a gay bar, maybe kiss a guy/girl, but --- unless you are a self-internalized homophobic or bisexual --- you'll never feel anything, just as I would never feel satisfaction if I chose to be with a woman. God said for me to find a suitable partner (singular, I may add; I'm not going to be some shameless prostitute who has random sex with no meaning. Being gay is not just about sex; being straight is not just about sex.), so I shall.

I've gone through stages in my life where I tried to get rid of my sexuality. I fasted, beat myself, cut myself, bit myself, had therapy, prayed constantly, humbled myself, held a cross to my head expecting to become straight, stared at women to try to find some sexual amusement, avoided Athletics so I wouldn't be forced to see my classmates in their underwear, etc. I was a mess. I was going to kill myself, because I couldn't be myself.

Now I'm a happy, enthusiastic person, with a loving, humbling relationship with my Lord and Father. You should be ashamed of your views... which linger on idiocy, as any reasonable, open-minded person would realize. --Bocaj910 22:16, 17 November 2011 (EST)

Bocaj910, if you are an homosexual, I doubt you are truly a Christian... Maybe you should try to read the bible.--PhilipN 23:11, 17 November 2011 (EST)
I am certainly Christian. Did you not read my entire comment? I was saved by the blood of Jesus Christ and baptized by my Church. I pray, read the Bible when possible, repent, and am weary of obvious sins. Homosexuality is --- in my standpoint --- not a sin. Oh yes, there are certainly scriptures that I'm sure you would just love to throw into my face for the thousandth time, but was the Bible not also used to justify murderous crusades, sexism, slavery, discrimination of left-handed persons, etc? You cannot question whether a person is Christian or not simply based on sexual preference. --Bocaj910 23:19, 17 November 2011 (EST)
Let's face the facts. Homosexuality is not normal. If everyone were homosexual, the human race would cease to exist. Can we agree that the rectum has but one purpose? You could be gay and Christian but it doesn't make it right. Just like you could be Christian and support abortion, not right. Jesus does love you even though you are gay. If you are a gay Christian, you are called to put away your selfish desires and to embrace celibacy. --Jpatt 23:26, 17 November 2011 (EST)
If my gay desires are selfish, your straight desires are also selfish. Imagine having to live a life with no wife to love. It's a lot harder than it sounds, huh? Unnatural and sinful are too totally separate things. It is unnatural for a couple to marry but to decide to not have children, but there is nothing wrong with that, is there? *cough* Yes, my rectum does have but one purpose that I am fully aware of. Anal sex was never attractive to me. If I was gay and supported abortion, I would support the murder of millions of innocent fetuses. That's a lot worse than homosexuality could ever be. If you're using the argument that a homosexual world would go extinct, than senior citizens being married should also be banned. --Bocaj910 23:33, 17 November 2011 (EST)
Your counter statements are not convincing. Your gay relationships are not love, they are lust. You can love another man as a companion. When the relationship becomes sexual than you embrace lust and sin. Christians who do not conform to your views should be ashamed is laughable. Lucky for you, you aren't living in Iran. --Jpatt 00:09, 18 November 2011 (EST)
"Imagine having to live a life with no wife to love. It's a lot harder than it sounds, huh?" A pedophile (which is not something I'm comparing you to) could use the same argument and it would be equally valid. Just because it gives you pleasure does not mean its good, or else we would legalise just about every narcotic there is.
"It is unnatural for a couple to marry but to decide to not have children, but there is nothing wrong with that, is there?" I would argue that if the two hypothetical lovers here were capable of producing children but decided not to then yes, it would be wrong. I think Rick Santorum got it right in regards to contraception.
On a side note, I must inform you that this website encourages actuall contributions to articles rather than spending excessive amount of time on talk pages, ie if 90% or more of your edits are to talk page than you might be liable for a block. If you want to stay here I suggest that you start making more edits to articles than talk pages, I'm sure that as long that you're adding factual content supported by citations your contributions will be welcomed regardless of your views. - Markman 00:23, 18 November 2011 (EST)
Gay relationships are not exclusively about lust. Obviously there is sexual desire, yes, but the main thing I care about is romantic love, and I cannot have that with a woman; believe me, I've tried. Living in Iran would cause my death surely, but I would die a martyr to my beliefs and rights. Markman, just because two groups of people (gays and pedophiles) could uphold the same argument does not mean that both are incorrect. If such relationships are sinful, than many of my very conservative relatives deserve some worthy punishment. And some of them also deserve to be stoned for adultery, it seems. A relationship between to consenting gay lovers seems a lot more humane and normal than a pedophile raping an unwilling child, or an individual partaking in bizarre sexual acts with a poor animal, so I don't see how some of these conservatives can compare me to such acts as pedophilia and bestiality. (Homosexuality and pedophilia do not go hand-and-hand, may I add) --Bocaj910 15:13, 18 November 2011 (EST)
I'm only contributing my own personal opinion on this matter because whomever wrote this is considerably deluded. It's a fact that being a homosexual is generally not a choice. I could choose to not act on my natural feelings and ignore my sexuality, but... in the past, where I have attempted such, I was on the verge of suicide. That is certainly not God's plan for me. Likewise, my relationship with the Lord has improved since I ceased my "ex-gay" practices. To me, it seems like living this way is wholly beneficial to my mental, spiritual, and potentially physical health. --Bocaj910 15:18, 18 November 2011 (EST)
Oh, and referring to your link, I see no evil or wickedness in the use of a condom for married couples. Sex is God's gift. No sexual act is wicked between a married couple. Try to argue with that, but the Bible clearly says it. --Bocaj910 15:21, 18 November 2011 (EST)
Bocaj910, you are entitled to your own views, but I will tell you right now that the Bible does NOT condone homosexuality, or any other form of sexual deviancy. Please see:
  • “If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination.” (Leviticus 20:13)
  • “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived, neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)

Also, excessive talk is a time-waster. Write some substantive content, or you may be banned. See 90/10 rule. Thanks.--James Wilson 15:45, 18 November 2011 (EST)

Even though it doesn't seem like you're going to come back here, I still feel that I should reply to you just to set the record straight.
"If such relationships are sinful, than many of my very conservative relatives deserve some worthy punishment." That entirely irelevant - just because many people engage in a certain act does not mean it's not wrong.
"A relationship between to consenting gay lovers seems a lot more humane and normal than a pedophile raping an unwilling child." While homosexual relationships do not have to be non-consensual (in contrast to child molestation, which is by definition coercive), they still undermine the moral fabric of society. Alcoholics and drug users might not necessarily engage in acts of coercion, but they're still living an immoral lifestyle.
"I could choose to not act on my natural feelings and ignore my sexuality, but... in the past, where I have attempted such, I was on the verge of suicide. That is certainly not God's plan for me. Likewise, my relationship with the Lord has improved since I ceased my "ex-gay" practices. To me, it seems like living this way is wholly beneficial to my mental, spiritual, and potentially physical health." So your argument basically goes like this: 1) Not acting on my urges is uncomfortable to me. 2) God does not wish to me to feel discomfort. 3) Ergo, God wants me to have sex with members of my own gender.
I ask you, was the misfortune Job had to endure not a part of God's plan for him? Because that is the conclusion one is led to following your logic. God works in mysterious ways, and often we do not feel at ease with the paths he puts us in.
"and referring to your link, I see no evil or wickedness in the use of a condom for married couples. Sex is God's gift. No sexual act is wicked between a married couple. Try to argue with that, but the Bible clearly says it." Countless of theologians and clergy men will tell you otherwise.
Look at the facts. Every major religions condemns homosexuality (even Islam) and so do most cultures, it's been condemned for generations and even secular psychiatry (known for advocating sexual hedonism due to the views of Sigmund Freud) saw it as a mental ilness until they caved in to activist pressures in the 70's. I don't know how exactly how you tried to fight your urges but you shouldn't have stopped doing it just because it's difficult. A disease may be relentless but that's no reason to stop trying to find a cure. I suggest you go look for a therapist to help you out, and no matter the outcome of the therapy do not act on your urges. Even if Depo-Provera is needed for it I suggest you do everything to fight those urges within you.
And again I'll remind you the 90/10 rule. If you want to continue editing here you better add substance. - Markman 16:58, 19 November 2011 (EST)
In all honesty, I have already tried with exponential effort to get rid of my once unwanted feelings. These "ex-gays" famous for "being cleansed of their sexuality" as they say are deceitful and full of a heap of self-denial, regardless of what you say. Please, I urge you to read with impartiality through this ex-"ex-gay" man's website. He claimed that he was cured after countless sessions of dozens of strategies to remove his homosexual desires, to no avail. http://www.billprickett.com/ex-gay-movement.html And sure, you could just say that this is something we just have to live with for the rest of our lives, always praying for forgiveness of it, but that life is dangerous to my well-being, and everyone else who tries it. It causes suicide and bitterness toward our God, which He does not deserve. He deserves love and worship, and reconciling my faith with my sexuality allows me to do such. Some of these ex-gays appear happy, and I know some of them may sincerely be in a great state of mind, but either their homosexuality truly was a phase, they were bisexual, or they just lied about being gay in the first place. Being gay is a healthy way of living; pretending to be straight is NOT. I applaud all people who choose to remain abstinent, though, whether gay or straight. Cheers for their strength.
"1) Not acting on my urges is uncomfortable to me. 2) God does not wish to me to feel discomfort. 3) Ergo, God wants me to have sex with members of my own gender."
1) It's not only uncomfortable for me. It's dangerous to my livelihood.
2) This is primarily true. Although at times God puts us through trials to make us stronger and more humble as human beings. Trying to not be gay is NOT one of these struggles.
3) Er, I plan to only have sex with only one member of my own gender, thank you. A single husband is all I need. God said likewise before, yes, but look at the facts: the laws of Leviticus were temporary, and only required of the Jews. There was more powerful message behind that. It's funny how being gay is an abomination to you, but you and a lot of other Christians feel no guilt when you eat a slice of bacon. That scripture in Corinthians being used to condemn homosexuals is laughable. Read this:

"The Jewish law was created by God to help regulate human behavior. To remind the churches in Corinth and Ephesus how God wants us to treat one another, Paul recites examples from the Jewish law first. Don't kill one another. Don't sleep with a person who is married to someone else. Don't lie or cheat or steal. The list goes on to include admonitions against fornication, idolatry, whoremongering, perjury, drunkenness, revelry, and extortion. He also includes "malokois" and "arsenokoitai."

Here's where the confusion begins. What's a malokois? What's an arsenokoitai? Actually, those two Greek words have confused scholars to this very day. We'll say more about them later, when we ask what the texts say about sex. But first let's see what the texts say about God.

After quoting from the Jewish law, Paul reminds the Christians in Corinth that they are under a new law: the law of Jesus, a law of love that requires us to do more than just avoid murder, adultery, lying, cheating, and stealing. Paul tells them what God wants is not strict adherence to a list of laws, but a pure heart, a good conscience, and a faith that isn't phony.

That's the lesson we all need to learn from these texts. God doesn't want us squabbling over who is "in" and who is "out." God wants us to love one another. It's God's task to judge us. It is NOT our task to judge one another.

So what do these two texts say about homosexuality? Are gays and lesbians on that list of sinners in the Jewish law that Paul quotes to make an entirely different point?

Greek scholars say that in first century the Greek word malaokois probably meant "effeminate call boys." The New Revised Standard Version says "male prostitutes."

As for arsenokoitai, Greek scholars don't know exactly what it means -- and the fact that we don't know is a big part of this tragic debate. Some scholars believe Paul was coining a name to refer to the customers of "the effeminate call boys." We might call them "dirty old men." Others translate the word as "sodomites," but never explain what that means.

In 1958, for the first time in history, a person translating that mysterious Greek word into English decided it meant homosexuals, even though there is, in fact, no such word in Greek or Hebrew. But that translator made the decision for all of us that placed the word homosexual in the English-language Bible for the very first time.

In the past, people used Paul's writings to support slavery, segregation, and apartheid. People still use Paul's writings to oppress women and limit their role in the home, in church, and in society.

Now we have to ask ourselves, "Is it happening again?" Is a word in Greek that has no clear definition being used to reflect society's prejudice and condemn God's gay children?

We all need to look more closely at that mysterious Greek word arsenokoitai in its original context. I find most convincing the argument from history that Paul is condemning the married men who hired hairless young boys (malakois) for sexual pleasure just as they hired smooth-skinned young girls for that purpose.

Responsible homosexuals would join Paul in condemning anyone who uses children for sex, just as we would join anyone else in condemning the threatened gang rape in Sodom or the behavior of the sex-crazed priests and priestesses in Rome. So, once again, I am convinced that this passage says a lot about God, but nothing about homosexuality as we understand it today."

The scripture in Romans uses the word "unnatural". Unnatural isn't necessarily sinful. The story of Sodom and Gomorrah doesn't compare to homosexuals, but more to male prostitutes and prideful men raping other men as a sign of ultimate dominance.
I said it once, and I'll say it again. The Bible has been used to condemn so many things, like: Sexism, slavery, murder of alternate religions, and racism. It also condones behaviors that are condemned today like polygamy. I doubt it's possible to ever change your typical opinion, sadly. Just try to open your mind up to these things I am showing you. If you dare say anything like, "God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve," I will no longer respect your opinion. God also calls us to find a suitable partner. Eve was a suitable partner to Adam. Steve may be a suitable to a different Adam, and Anna a suitable partner to a different Eve, etc. --Bocaj910 18:30, 20 November 2011 (EST)
Me and James warned you about violating the 90/10 rule three times already, and since you ignored those warnings I have no choice but to block you for a year. If you decide to defy this ban and return here once more using a sockpuppet, I will block you again and this time it will be infinite.
With that, I’ll still answer the points you made just in case you’ll read my reply and reconsider your views and ways. First of, you completely ignored what I had to say regarding the story of Job; God put him in a much greater hardship than yours, so don’t claim that not having sex with other men is against God’s plan for you just because it puts you in inconvenience.
”It's funny how being gay is an abomination to you, but you and a lot of other Christians feel no guilt when you eat a slice of bacon.” For the record I’m not a Christian but a Jew. While I do not want to speak for other people’s religion, everything I know and have read leads me to the conclusion that Christianity condemns homosexual relations. When you try to argue otherwise you’re not only arguing against the majority of the members of this site, you’re also arguing against just about every Christian clergyman and theologian there is, both past and present, and also against the very scriptures you profess to follow.
Despite the tremendous efforts liberals put in promoting homosexuality, it's still widely condemned around the world by members of all faiths and creeds. It is not only condemned by Judaism and Christianity, but also by Islam, Hindusim, Buddhism, Shinto, and just about every religion there is. If homosexual activists had not used some serious bullying in the 70’s, it would still be condemned by secular Psychiatry as well. Think about that the next time you decide to act on your urges.
And finally, regarding your lack of success in fighting your sexual desires. First of, were you aided by a therapist while fighting those urges or had you tried to conquer them by yourself? If it’s the latter than I strongly suggest that you go seek professional help so you might gain a better outcome this second time.
With that, I am willing to accept that reparative therapy might not work for everyone. But even if it fails you it does not mean that you should surrender to your lust. Diseases are often relentless in the face of medicine but we still try to defeat them. In case you find yourself unchanged despite of all efforts, celibacy might be the answer for you. I know that cyproterone and Depo-Provera are useful in suppressing the sexual urge and if I were in your situation I would have seriously thought of using them. - Markman 03:14, 21 November 2011 (EST)

An Idea.

They don't.

Many times people turn out gay when their background etc. means that most people that they know would be against it, and that it would cause problems. The only conclusion to draw from this is that for many, if not all homosexual individuals there is little or no conscious decision making involved. Also, I'm pretty sure that peer pressure doesn't work that way around in most places today, if you think about it 'gay' is synonymous with 'lame' and 'fag' is the internet insult de jour. Cmurphynz 03:32, 2 November 2012 (EDT)

Though to be honest I did just find this article [1] where a guy was bisexual or something, but then decided to be Gay (with a capital apparently) so some form of choice does occur sometimes. Cmurphynz 07:02, 2 November 2012 (EDT)
I know a female friend of a friend of mine (who volunteers at a shelter which is she knows her) is now a lesbian/bi because she was severely and repeatedly sexually assaulted and abused by a former partner and his mates. Given what they did to her I don't really blame her not wanting another man. She is a really nice person who unfortunetly has had some aweful things happen to her. Dvergne 07:59, 2 November 2012 (EDT)
Retrieved from "https://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Mystery:Why_do_people_choose_homosexuality%3F&oldid=1016298"