Is it a choice?

[wanderingone]

Incorrect.Of course, because we start out in life needing that kind of attention and validation. We're sure as heck not supposed to end up that way.

Needing love is not the same as needing "validation" or "attention". Perhaps you are thinking of something else along the line of self esteem or self love. We really have a very hard time loving another when our own needs are not fulfilled and when we don't care for ourselves. Just because one is content at any given time without romantic love doesn't mean we don't need some type of intimate human companionship.

 

[MoonlessNight]

I was born without fluency in English and also without any predisposition towards learning English in particular.

Therefore I made a conscious decision to become fluent in English (though I don't remember doing so).

I think it would be best for everyone involved to have a more nuanced view of human behavior. There does seem to be a thought of "it's genetically determined completely or else it is a choice made in life." Most things are a mix of both factors as well as environment, etc. And then we have the matter of one's current state and predispositions versus potentials, abilities, and choices of behavior.

 

[ke1985]

there isn't any scientific proof that people are born homosexuals and science will never be able to prove this.

 

[yguy]

We really have a very hard time loving another when our own needs are not fulfilled

Then how do you expect to love your enemies, especially if they turn out to be members of your own household?

 

[PhilosophicalBluster]

At one time, back in the 70s and 80s, gay people claimed that it wasn't a choice. Religious folks said that it clearly was, that no one is born gay. The University of Minnesota did Twin Studies about this issue, and found that there was a physical component. Religious folks either claimed that science was denying God, that the studies were lying, and I'm sure "liberal propaganda" slipped out of someone's mouth, although the studies were approved before peers for accuracy.

Of those who were anti-gay but decided to actually believe the truth, and something that gays have been saying all along, then it became a choice of how one is going to live their life, focusing on homosexuals and demanding celibacy, and ignoring sexually active single heterosexuals, and saying very little about it.

Some chose to quote Cameron, who has been shown to have false data, poor practices in procedure of his studies, and accused of misrepresenting, (or bearing false witness.)
"In 1996, the Board of Directors of the Canadian Psychological Association approved a position statement disassociating the organisation from Cameron's work on sexuality, stating that he had "consistently misinterpreted and misrepresented research on sexuality, homosexuality, and lesbianism". http://www.cpa.ca/aboutcpa/policystatements/
Yet, these same people will present these misrepresentations/lies as fact, and see no sin in it.

Biblically, they will ignore the extensive research that indicates that the bible does not condemn homosexuality as they say it does, and again, ignore the sin of lying (that it doesn't exist), of saying the bible says something that it doesn't, claiming that the bible has never changed (slavery was once thought moral because of the bible), etc.

So, there is no winning the argument with those who have no intention of edifying, but simply edifying themselves by condemning others. Jesus himself could come down and say, "I didn't say that" and they would argue that he was wrong, as the Pharisees, the holy ones who claimed to worship God, did.

They will argue that a law is a law, and not take into context of when, who was speaking, to whom, stress 2 verses in Leviticus, and ignore the rest, and argue that there doesn't have to be a reason. They won't even look at a gay relationship, won't listen to the support and love given and received, and reduce it to sex.

So, the question is it a choice? The question is moot to people that promote lies, and won't listen, and claim to know God like the back of their hand.

Well sir, I believe you have just won the thread. Congratulations.

 

[PhilosophicalBluster]

there isn't any scientific proof that people are born homosexuals and science will never be able to prove this.

We'll just take your word for it.

 

[Robbie_James_Francis]

The tiniest bit of analysis shows sexuality cannot be a choice. Those that say it is are either liars or idiots.

there isn't any scientific proof that people are born homosexuals and science will never be able to prove this.

That isn't the question, the question is whether sexuality is a choice. Whether or not homosexuality, or heterosexuality, is purely caused by genetics has no bearing on the question of whether a person chooses their sexuality.

 

[Oonna]

there isn't any scientific proof that people are born homosexuals and science will never be able to prove this.

Did you choose to be straight? Thats what im asking.

As far as science goes, its a funny thing...always looking at new things and finding evidence of things 100 years ago no one would of thunk of. Never say never.

 

[Garyzenuf]

Did you choose to be straight? Thats what im asking.

No.


It would be nice if we could all agree that (for whatever reason) we're all attracted to different kinds, and sexes of people and just leave it at that. I could no more be attracked to a man than I could start liking cats, more than puppies. It's just they way I'm wired.

*

 

[TeddyKGB]

False dichotomy. What homosexuals have chosen is to listen to a voice or voices, internal or external, which tell them to look for love from other people rather than from God. As a consequence they find themselves inordinately attracted to members of their own sex, where heteros who make the same mistake find themselves inordinately attracted to members of the same sex.

It's hard to believe this made sense in your head before you put it to words.

 

[PhilosophicalBluster]

It's hard to believe this made sense in your head before you put it to words.

Oh snap!

 

[yguy]

It's hard to believe this made sense in your head before you put it to words.

OTOH, it's easy to believe you can't find fault with any of it.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Is being gay a choice?

I dont think it is. I never made that choice. Did you? The thought of being with another woman sexually...well to be honest is gives me the heebie jeebies. I dont think there is anything on this earth that could make me be with a woman minus violence or threats. I suppose this i why i have always believed that gay people are born that way. And if gay people are born gay, ( are you following the logic here) then this must be the way God wanted them right? So if God wanted gay people to be gay, why would he make it a "sin" to be the way he made them?

Why would he do that?

ANOTHER GAY ACTIVISM THREAD?

This is becoming baggering.

 

[PhilosophicalBluster]

OTOH, it's easy to believe you can't find fault with any of it.

False dichotomy. What homosexuals have chosen is to listen to a voice or voices, internal or external, which tell them to look for love from other people rather than from God. As a consequence they find themselves inordinately attracted to members of their own sex, where heteros who make the same mistake find themselves inordinately attracted to members of the same sex.

How about this: You don't know what is and is not from G-d. As much as you claim to know G-d, Christianity is as good a guess as anybody else makes. That's why we're having this debate. Because nobody actually knows.

 

[PhilosophicalBluster]

ANOTHER GAY ACTIVISM THREAD?

This is becoming baggering.

This is E&M, what do you want us to talk about?

 

[Polycarp_fan]

This is E&M, what do you want us to talk about?

Stimulus Bill maybe?

The takeover of our country by Barack and Rahm.

Taxing only Democrats since they're so into that?

Politics has alot of ethics and morality about it that doesn't always have to be JUST of a political nature.

 

[PhilosophicalBluster]

Stimulus Bill maybe?

The takeover of our country by Barack and Rahm.

Taxing only Democrats since they're so into that?

Politics has alot of ethics and morality about it that doesn't always have to be JUST of a political nature.

Why not visit the political forum then?

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Why not visit the political forum then?

Ethics and morality. Obama is stuffing the wallets of Democrat orgs and that is niether ethical or moral.

It's NOT just politics. And it's certainly not change we can believe in. It's the same old sham.

Is totalitarianism ethical and moral?

 

[PhilosophicalBluster]

Ethics and morality. Obama is stuffing the wallets of Democrat orgs and that is niether ethical or moral.

It's NOT just politics. And it's certainly not change we can believe in. It's the same old sham.

Is totalitarianism ethical and moral?

Why don't you start a thread about it? Would that make you feel better?

 

[ranmaonehalf]

Frankly i dont care it it is or isnt a choice. There is nothing wrong with it period.