A matter of choice....

[Kira Light]

I have just read a balanced and compassionate article in the Washington Post (called Pictures From an Execution Come Into Focus, July 20 2006).

If homosexuality is simply a lifestyle choice, why would people make those choices in a country like Iran? There, severe penalties (including death) are used as punishment for homosexual acts.

There are sure to be further executions of gay people in Iran. Those of you who believe that one's sexuality is just a matter of choice might like to think how they would feel if they had to convey those opinions to the parents of the people concerned. Picture yourself in the same room as them, face to face. Just imagine telling the grieving parents that their son could still be free and alive today if only he had simply decided to be heterosexual instead. If that mental picture doesn't dent a few of your certainties, I don't know what will.

I understand what you're saying, but I'm not sure it is the best example. You can look at any sexual deviancy and the consequences that come with it and say that because there is a severe punishment for it the person must have had no choice. Does a person who rapes or molests kids not have a choice? Why would they do that knowing the consequences if they had a choice? Were they born with an attraction to children? Why do we punish these people for how they were born?

 

[Sophia7]

I understand what you're saying, but I'm not sure it is the best example. You can look at any sexual deviancy and the consequences that come with it and say that because there is a severe punishment for it the person must have had no choice. Does a person who rapes or molests kids not have a choice? Why would they do that knowing the consequences if they had a choice? Were they born with an attraction to children? Why do we punish these people for how they were born?

They have a choice about engaging in those behaviors. They may not have a choice about their desires.

 

[AzA]

Kira --
One might think that you're begging the question by classing homosexuality as sexual deviance.

But "deviance" is a social construction that changes as social conventions change across time, space, and context. ["All rules are conventions; all conventions are not rules."]

You are begging the question by classing homosexuality with rape and molestation, so perhaps you can explore on what basis you're doing so. What do these things have in common? They are social. But so is sharing ice cream with someone. I can't even go so far as to say that they are social acts -- because homosexuality isn't a act; it's an orientation.

The orientation of homosexuality has many things that differentiate it from the acts of rape and molestation. As do the orientations of heterosexuality, bisexuality, pansexuality, and asexuality.

 

[AzA]

On choice, I just read something interesting cited from p. 153 of the 1998 Gay and Lesbian Almanac: "Females (heterosexual or otherwise) also limit who they divulge their sexual identities to and more often see being lesbian as a choice, as opposed to gay men, who work more externally and see being gay as outside their control."

I wonder if there's been any further work on that. Stormy, perhaps that's something you can look into?

 

[Kira Light]

Kira --
One might think that you're begging the question by classing homosexuality as sexual deviance.

But "deviance" is a social construction that changes as social conventions change across time, space, and context. ["All rules are conventions; all conventions are not rules."]

You are begging the question by classing homosexuality with rape and molestation, so perhaps you can explore on what basis you're doing so. What do these things have in common? They are social. But so is sharing ice cream with someone. I can't even go so far as to say that they are social acts -- because homosexuality isn't a act; it's an orientation.

The orientation of homosexuality has many things that differentiate it from the acts of rape and molestation. As do the orientations of heterosexuality, bisexuality, pansexuality, and asexuality.

I am not addressing homosexuality itself so much but rather the argument that it must be a choice because people engage in homosexual acts even in the face of brutal punishments. This just seems faulty to me because I can think of other sexual acts that people commit even in the face of life ending punishment. Aren't pedophiles just as much a victim of their own involuntary desires?

I am not saying homosexuality is the same as any of those other things you listed, but I do think valid comparisons can be made.

 

[AzA]

I am not addressing homosexuality itself so much but rather the argument that it must be a choice because people engage in homosexual acts even in the face of brutal punishments. This just seems faulty to me because I can think of other sexual acts that people commit even in the face of life ending punishment. Aren't pedophiles just as much a victim of their own involuntary desires?

I am not saying homosexuality is the same as any of those other things you listed, but I do think valid comparisons can be made.

I understand. Of course, nothing is "the same" as anything else. The question in any comparison or analogy is whether the consonances are stronger than the dissonances. In this case, I don't know that you've made the case at all, but it's important to do so because the comparison is very, very common. But that doesn't make it sound. Or helpful.

Re. punishment and cost, yes, it's true that people do all sorts of things -- "good" and "bad", creative and destructive, healing and damaging -- apparently without regard to cost. Or so it appears. Sometimes when I look at other people's lives what might be an overwhelming cost to me is either a gain or a manageable cost for them.

 

[BigRedBus]

You should not compare paedophilia with homosexuality just because there are instances where severe legal penalties apply to the two behaviours.

Paedophilia is abusive behaviour. It is about abuse of trust and abuse of power. It is about manipulation and the gratification of one person's desires at the expense of other people. It is definitely a form of sexual deviancy, and is quite rightly illegal.

Homosexual behaviour is not, of itself, sexual deviancy. A gay person wants outcomes from their relationships to be similar to the outcomes that the rest of society take for granted with their relationships. A healthy heterosexual relationship should be consensual and should be between equals, harming nobody. That's also just what any healthy same-sex partnership should be. If nobody is being harmed then it’s not a crime in any real sense.

It’s not difficult to see why two consenting adults should feel they have a right to behave as they wish in private together. They will consider it to be no business of anyone else’s who they are attracted to and who they love.

 

[Avonia]

Homosexual behaviour is not, of itself, sexual deviancy. A gay person wants outcomes from their relationships to be similar to the outcomes that the rest of society take for granted with their relationships.

Perfectly said.

 

[Kira Light]

It’s not difficult to see why two consenting adults should feel they have a right to behave as they wish in private together. They will consider it to be no business of anyone else’s who they are attracted to and who they love.

I don't know about the rest of the world, but this right exists abundantly in the US.

 

[BigRedBus]

I don't know about the rest of the world, but this right exists abundantly in the US.

This right exists in much of the Western world in theory, but in practice it still can and does lead to situations where the minority group is discriminated against by the majority.

In a way, this is what lies underneath this debate -- fundamentalist Christians (and others) can justify discriminatory thoughts and actions much more easily if they believe a particular minority is a minority by choice.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

This right exists in much of the Western world in theory, but in practice it still can and does lead to situations where the minority group is discriminated against by the majority.

I agree with you that this happens, probably in ways that I could not even begin to imagine. However, in western culture today, it is sad that there are also moments when the majority is disadvantaged.

BFA

 

[Kira Light]

This right exists in much of the Western world in theory, but in practice it still can and does lead to situations where the minority group is discriminated against by the majority.

In a way, this is what lies underneath this debate -- fundamentalist Christians (and others) can justify discriminatory thoughts and actions much more easily if they believe a particular minority is a minority by choice.

It makes me uncomfortable to start talking about "discriminatory thoughts". As appalling as certain thoughts may be, I believe people have a right to them. Any discriminatory actions are already punished quite severely, even more so because of "hate crime" legislation.

 

[StormyOne]

I agree with you that this happens, probably in ways that I could not even begin to imagine. However, in western culture today, it is sad that there are also moments when the majority is disadvantaged.

BFA

Explain the thought "there are also moments when the majority is disadvantaged."

 

[AzA]

Who people love is a private decision, but a relationship is a social matter. It is not simply private -- if it is healthy -- because it unfolds in the context of others.

My sister and her husband made the private decision to love one another, and their families attended the wedding. They express their love in a variety of private and public ways, none of which attract negative social sanctions.

My friend and her wife also made the private decision to love one another, and their families attended the wedding. They also express their love in a variety of private and public ways. Their private expressions are beyond the pale of the law, but have only been so since 2003 and the decision in Lawrence v Texas.

If my friends walk down their high street holding hands, they distinguish themselves and attract attention. If my sister and her husband walk down their high street holding hands, they do not distinguish themselves or attract attention.

There are all sorts of inequities between how society treats the two relationships and the standing of each partner in relation to their other. Some of these inequities are in the areas of labor, tax, will/trust, housing, medical, and insurance, but there are others. Many of these inequities are sustained by the law; others are sustained by majority indifference or malice. That is, some impacts are legal, and other impacts are social.

Just last month one teenager was told that she could not work at a certain food company because of her gender identity. The company was later sued and the manager fired -- but when was the last time you were told that you couldn't do an entry level job because of your gender? What might have happened if the teenager hadn't told her story and a sympathetic legal advocacy group hadn't picked up the case? She shouldn't have had to sue for equal treatment in the first place.

Another story: I know a couple who were married some years ago, but one of them is not a citizen. Were they heterosexual, the citizen could have long ago filed for the non-citizen. As it stands, the non-citizen's status is dependent on a particular job. If that job is ever lost as is increasingly common in this economy, the non-citizen has no standing here, will have to leave the country, and the home will be divided. The only factor distinguishing this couple in the eyes of the law is their sexuality.

I think claims about equity here, legal or social, are quite overblown.

 

[Kira Light]

Man, Aza you are way way into this gay agenda. I'm afraid we'll never agree on anything Are you an Adventist or a former one? I understand Christians being accepting and loving, but what you are talking about goes way beyond.

Even with all the drawbacks to homosexual relationships you list, it is still relatively awesome in the US for a gay person. Why isn't there more focus from your side on getting countries in the middle east to stop killing homosexuals? It seems theres a lot more work to do around the world before you focus back in on us.

For me, I really don't expect to see a perfect world out there, so I'm not disappointed when I don't see one. There are 1 billion people without enough food or clean drinking water. 30,000 children starve to death each day. MAYBE when we get this stuff all fixed up I will worry about medical or insurance related inequalities for gays in the US.

 

[StormyOne]

Man, Aza you are way way into this gay agenda. I'm afraid we'll never agree on anything Are you an Adventist or a former one? I understand Christians being accepting and loving, but what you are talking about goes way beyond.

Even with all the drawbacks to homosexual relationships you list, it is still relatively awesome in the US for a gay person. Why isn't there more focus from your side on getting countries in the middle east to stop killing homosexuals? It seems theres a lot more work to do around the world before you focus back in on us.

For me, I really don't expect to see a perfect world out there, so I'm not disappointed when I don't see one. There are 1 billion people without enough food or clean drinking water. 30,000 children starve to death each day. MAYBE when we get this stuff all fixed up I will worry about medical or insurance related inequalities for gays in the US.

Kira, I sense some defensiveness, and I am not certain where it comes from... first, why must there be a "gay agenda?" Secondly, we were simply sharing our views/ideas on the matter of homosexuality being a choice or not..... AzA shared that things in the day to day life of one who is homosexual is not all roses giving a few examples..... What difference would it make in the context of this discussion if AzA is adventist or non-adventist? Why do you say that the things AzA is suggesting is way out of bounds? It sounds like what you are saying is this, "fine if you must be gay do so but we don't want to see you, nor hear you, and don't expect equal treatment under the law." Is that what you are saying?

We were not talking about the starving millions of kids, we were talking about homosexuality as a choice... your introducing this issue means that you no longer choose to discuss homosexuality? That's cool, but those comments are a diversion/distraction to the topic at hand.... So if you are done, we don't mind you moving on, if you wish to continue though please do not discount the valid points made and let's hear what you think can be done as it pertains to this issue....

 

[Kira Light]

Kira, I sense some defensiveness, and I am not certain where it comes from... first, why must there be a "gay agenda?" Secondly, we were simply sharing our views/ideas on the matter of homosexuality being a choice or not..... AzA shared that things in the day to day life of one who is homosexual is not all roses giving a few examples..... What difference would it make in the context of this discussion if AzA is adventist or non-adventist? Why do you say that the things AzA is suggesting is way out of bounds? It sounds like what you are saying is this, "fine if you must be gay do so but we don't want to see you, nor hear you, and don't expect equal treatment under the law." Is that what you are saying?

We were not talking about the starving millions of kids, we were talking about homosexuality as a choice... your introducing this issue means that you no longer choose to discuss homosexuality? That's cool, but those comments are a diversion/distraction to the topic at hand.... So if you are done, we don't mind you moving on, if you wish to continue though please do not discount the valid points made and let's hear what you think can be done as it pertains to this issue....

Not trying to be defensive or hostile in any way. Trying to figure out how all of these gay rights issues jive with Christianity is all. If we are leaving Christianity and Adventism out of this discussion completely then I understand. If you simply want to debate how we can make gay peoples' lives better in America then I'll move on because in that context I truly have nothing to add.

 

[StormyOne]

Not trying to be defensive or hostile in any way. Trying to figure out how all of these gay rights issues jive with Christianity is all. If we are leaving Christianity and Adventism out of this discussion completely then I understand. If you simply want to debate how we can make gay peoples' lives better in America then I'll move on because in that context I truly have nothing to add.

ahhh ok.... so then let me ask... what should be your attitude and treatment of those who are gay? How can gay people feel at home in a christian and/or adventist setting? Do gay people face discrimination in church? If so, how can that be addressed....

 

[Kira Light]

I don't attend a church right now and I really have no idea what the discrimination is like there. I don't see how you can be actively engaging in homosexual acts as a born again Christian. I am open to being proven wrong here, but it seems to equate to the heterosexual sins of lust and adultery at the very least. Obviously, we are not saved by NOT sinning, so maybe its all just dandy, I don't really know. I firmly believe in surrendering totally to Jesus and letting him figure it out.

 

[Avonia]

I don't see how you can be actively engaging in homosexual acts as a born again Christian.

Some people are born with the sex organs of a man and a woman. Would you also deny them physical intimacy?