Gay Conversion Therapy

[Zoii]

Is your hetero-sexuality a lifestyle choice or is it innate and programmed into your sexual behaviour?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Does your principle about consenting adults apply to other things, like say, consenting to serving a specific party in exchange for monetary compensation? Like, say, baking a cake, taking photographs, or renting out an apartment? Or... does the whole "two consenting adults" fly out the door when someone withholds consent for a reason you find offensive?

If you're making the comparison that I think you are...which is, you're suggesting that one might be hypocritical if they take the "two consenting adults" with regards to marriage/relationships/etc...but don't side with religious people who want to deny service to someone, then you're reasoning is a bit flawed as it's not an apples to apples comparison.

For instance, if two guys down the street want to be married or in a relationship, that has absolutely zero negative impact on you or anyone else.

However, if a gay person is being denied service by a licensed business, that does impact them negatively.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

It's worth noting that a number of people have, at least for a time, changed behavior. It is certainly possible for someone with a same-sex orientation to remain celibate, and some have married people of the opposite sex. I question the wisdom and even morality, of doing the latter, but it's possible, and conservatives can point to examples. (I question its morality because it's unfair to the partner. A close relative of mine was in that position, and the results weren't good.)

Either scenario is an unmoral expectation to have of anyone else.

If someone takes the "we understand your attractions are built-in, and not 100% within your control", and accompanies that with "but since you can control your behavior and whether or not you act on them, we think you should remain celibate", that's still enforcing a double-standard.

Basically, they're saying "it's okay for people born one way to be able to act on their involuntary feelings...but others have to keep those feelings hidden and not act on them"

The "religious freedom" angle people are using is nothing more than people sucking sour grapes because the system isn't bowing down to their specific religious preferences anymore.

 

[JackRT]

If you're making the comparison that I think you are...which is, you're suggesting that one might be hypocritical if they take the "two consenting adults" with regards to marriage/relationships/etc...but don't side with religious people who want to deny service to someone, then you're reasoning is a bit flawed as it's not an apples to apples comparison.

For instance, if two guys down the street want to be married or in a relationship, that has absolutely zero negative impact on you or anyone else.

However, if a gay person is being denied service by a licensed business, that does impact them negatively.

Agree. The denial of service is not a moral issue but a human rights issue.

 

[JoeP222w]

I see in the Bible Jesus commanding people to repent of their sins. I don't see anything in there about conversion therapy.

Homosexuality is sin, just a lying, theft, fornication, adultery, murder, idolatry and all other sins. They need to repented of and they need to be born again in Jesus Christ, not treated as therapy.

You never hear about lying conversion therapy, adultery conversion therapy, murder conversion therapy, so why do we think it is in Christian doctrine for homosexual conversion therapy? They need the gospel, not therapy.

 

[JackRT]

You never hear about lying conversion therapy, adultery conversion therapy, murder conversion therapy, so why do we think it is in Christian doctrine for homosexual conversion therapy?

First, homosexual conversion therapy is not a doctrine in any Christian church that I am aware of. Secondly, by focusing on therapy for homosexuality and not the others, there is an implicit recognition that homosexuality is not a choice but a condition that needs treatment. Modern psychology now regards homosexuality as a condition that is largely untreatable and that attempts at treatment can actually be harmful to the patient. We see an echo of this in certain churches where attempts at exorcism have actually lead to the death of the patient.

 

[Jon Osterman]

Basically, they're saying "it's okay for people born one way to be able to act on their involuntary feelings...but others have to keep those feelings hidden and not act on them"

We insist that all sorts of people keep all sorts of feelings hidden and not act on them. That is just civilisation.

 

[JackRT]

We insist that all sorts of people keep all sorts of feelings hidden and not act on them. That is just civilisation.

That's true but why shouldn't civilization apply precisely the same set of standards on both homosexuals and heterosexuals?

 

[Jon Osterman]

That's true but why shouldn't civilization apply precisely the same set of standards on both homosexuals and heterosexuals?

Homosexuals can't procreate. Heterosexual sex is (usually) required to make children.

 

[JackRT]

Homosexuals can't procreate. Heterosexual sex is (usually) required to make children.

Do you have a point?

 

[Jon Osterman]

Do you have a point?

Heterosexual sex and homosexual sex are different. One is sanctioned by God for the production of children, while the other is declared an abomination to God. Seems fairly simple.

 

[durangodawood]

Is your hetero-sexuality a lifestyle choice or is it innate and programmed into your sexual behaviour?

Obviously its a lifestyle choice the way its constantly reinforced in tv, movies, music, etc, as part of the heterosexual agenda. You cant go to a single movie these days without seeing two people of the opposite sex kissing.

 

[Zoii]

Obviously its a lifestyle choice the way its constantly reinforced in tv, movies, music, etc, as part of the heterosexual agenda. You cant go to a single movie these days without seeing two people of the opposite sex kissing.

I wouldn't allow a movie or music video be my source of credible information.

 

[Tiras84]

Homosexuals can't procreate. Heterosexual sex is (usually) required to make children.

There are many heterosexuals who cannot procreate. Do you apply the same set of standards to these heterosexuals that you apply to homosexuals?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

We insist that all sorts of people keep all sorts of feelings hidden and not act on them. That is just civilisation.

...but typically we apply that standard evenly when it comes to most things. This is one instance where we don't, and people want this double-standard to be enforced by rule of law by denying licensing, without a single compelling, non-religious reason (meaning it fails the Lemon Test).

Things like "urge to steal", "urge to assault someone", etc... all have compelling, non-religious reasons for restricting someone's urge to act on something.

 

[Jon Osterman]

There are many heterosexuals who cannot procreate. Do you apply the same set of standards to these heterosexuals that you apply to homosexuals?

Of course! And also to heterosexuals who have intercourse for lustful reasons.

 

[Jon Osterman]

...but typically we apply that standard evenly when it comes to most things. This is one instance where we don't, and people want this double-standard to be enforced by rule of law by denying licensing, without a single compelling, non-religious reason (meaning it fails the Lemon Test).

Things like "urge to steal", "urge to assault someone", etc... all have compelling, non-religious reasons for restricting someone's urge to act on something.

No-one is suggesting outlawing homosexuality. At least that was not my impression on this thread. So I don't see why you are comparing homosexual sex to stealing or assault. In fact, that seems rather low and insulting to the homosexual community.

 

[Tiras84]

Of course! And also to heterosexuals who have intercourse for lustful reasons.

So infertile heterosexuals should not get married as doing so would mean that any intercourse they had would be for lustful reasons.

 

[JackRT]

So infertile heterosexuals should not get married as doing so would mean that any intercourse they had would be for lustful reasons.

My wife (of 45 years) and I have always found that lust was good clean fun.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

No-one is suggesting outlawing homosexuality. At least that was not my impression on this thread. So I don't see why you are comparing homosexual sex to stealing or assault. In fact, that seems rather low and insulting to the homosexual community.

Seems like you're taking something I said and twisting it out of context.

My statement was a reply to those who take the stance "well, we understand that it's out of your control and you can't help the way you feel, so we suggest that you simply don't act on it" (even though everyone else is allowed to act on there built-in attractions)...as I simply pointed out that it's a double standard.

And that's when you replied with "We insist that all sorts of people keep all sorts of feelings hidden and not act on them. That is just civilization."

I pointed out that the types of feelings we require to keep hidden, and not act on, (legally speaking) are ones that have compelling, non-religious reasoning behind restricting...IE, a person's urge to take something that isn't theirs.