What do you think of homosexuality (and gay marriage) ?

[Maciamo]

As a continuation of the threads about gay marriage, I'd like to survey where people stand on this issue, including those who haven't expressed themselves so far.

please read those posts to know my view on the issue :

Is homosexuality natural (genetical, inborn) ?

Can immoral sexual behaviours be criminalized ?

Gay marriage in other countries than the US

Please read this before voting, or you might not understand fully the issues at stake.

[acquiredtarget]

One could argue that gay marriage could provide an boost to the new economy as more marriages are planned, catered, locations rented, gifts purchased, new households created, new furniture purchased, etc. Of course the divorce rate would probably increase also, so that would mean new households are created, new furniture is purchased, etc, etc etc.

But let me ask this, why bother? The divorce rate in the States is rather high, and with gay marriage, that would undoubtly increase some, so why go through all that?

Buuuuuuut when I consider my personal opinion, so I suppose someone else should get married.

[Mimmy_08]

I don't mind gays but gay marriage should not be allowed as it'd change the meaning of marriage

[Elizabeth]

In all honesty, my stereotype of gays and lesbians is somewhat negative (self-involved, aggressive and emotional, demanding, tempermental, etc) but as long as allowing this right doesn't lead down the road to legalized polygamy and polyamory (group marriage, it is in the Bible after all....:)) I can't come up with any reasonable objection.

[PaulTB]

As a continuation of the threads about gay marriage, I'd like to survey where people stand on this issue, including those who haven't expressed themselves so far.

Yah, but I wouldn't be surprised if the results are affected by your vote being public in this poll.

================================================== =

In all honesty, my stereotype of gays and lesbians is somewhat negative (self-involved, aggressive and emotional, demanding, tempermental, etc)

I suspect that comes mostly from those who _want_ to be noticed. An overly 'in your face' attitude could also easily result from a reaction to negative attitudes encountered elsewhere (e.g. the more you're pushed the more you push back).

My limited direct experience of lesbian and gay couple* they did as well or rather better than the hetrosexual couples I know.

Of course it probably also depends a lot on where you are in which country.

* Yes, that's right - singular. One lesbian couple and one gay couple

I don't mind gays but gay marriage should not be allowed as it'd change the meaning of marriage

I think that one of the partners is traditionally male and one traditionally female is not the most important part of the meaning of marriage.

If, on the other hand, you're concerned about the religious significance of marriage then I think you are too late.

[EscaFlowne]

I picked the last choice. Because they are like normal people and deserve the same right as anyone. My god thier human, some people act like that becaus they like the same sex they are a different species!

[jovial_jon]

Ummm...I picked the 5th and 8th ones.

[TwistedMac]

5 & 8.. because I live in Sweden.. the REAL land of the free.
except for the fact that you can't wear swastikas in public.. that's basically the only opression we have around here.

[PaulTB]

5 & 8.. because I live in Sweden.. the REAL land of the free.
except for the fact that you can't wear swastikas in public.. that's basically the only opression we have around here.

5 is a very badly worded option (which is why I didn't pick it).

"Homosexuality cannot be seen as immoral as it is inborn and not a matter of personal choice"

First of all it is assuming something which is far from known to be true. "Homosexuality is inborn."

While it is certain that there is a significant genetic association it is not the case that if you're born with the same genes as someone who is gay / lesbian you will also certainly be gay / lesbian. If grow up to be not gay and your identical twin grows up to be gay - was that difference established in the womb? At 1, 5, 10, 15 years old?

Secondly it's a false linkage. Do things necessarily become moral if you have an inborn desire to do them? What of people who are born without the normal capacity to develop a conscience? Is a psychopath not immoral in his actions because they result from an inborn difference? (Obviously I am NOT suggesting homosexuality is psychopathic - I'm just pointing out a flaw in the logic).

In fact much that I view as moral consists of controling ones impulses and desires in the face of the needs, feelings and mores of others.

So, should homosexuality not be viewed as immoral? YES.

Homosexuality cannot be seen as immoral as it is inborn and not a matter of personal choice. NO.

[jovial_jon]

I agree with what you're saying Paul, but I still pick it as I think it is inborn and the statement is still pretty close. I suppose if you put in the word 'and' in lieu of the second 'as' it would fit my opinion better.

It does annoy me a bit when why people are gay is discussed; what does it matter? I don't see how it is relevant, but hey.

[PaulTB]

I agree with what you're saying Paul, but I still pick it as I think it is inborn

Hmm, I very strongly doubt it is inborn for absolutely 100% of people who call themselves gay / lesbian when adult.
I also as strongly believe that it is inborn (as much as hetrosexuality is inborn for most people) in a major proportion of cases.

Exactly where it falls isn't really relevant.

I suppose if you put in the word 'and' in lieu of the second 'as' it would fit my opinion better.

Exactly - it's a lousy idea to fit two opinions into the same poll question.

[TwistedMac]

I agree with you guys.
But polls are usually like that, you have to make small compromises, so I just accepted it
(I thought if Jovial can accept it then so can I)

[Winter]

It does annoy me a bit when why people are gay is discussed; what does it matter? .

While some people do seem to be naturally homosexual, a lot of times homosexuality later in life is a trait that was engrained in the psyche of the person sometimes through a truamatic experience while they were developing mentally.

Sexual abuse can often lead to acting out sexually in adolescence, and adulthood either by promiscuity, society-deemed lewd behaviour, or a lot of the times, a conflict in sexual identity.

So it may not matter in some cases why people are gay *for those naturally gay*, but when it comes to the person having a history of truamatic sexual abuse, I think that is a matter worth caring about. Sexual abuse is nothing to just cast aside.

[jovial_jon]

Ok, fair point. Although, I wasn't casting aside sexual abuse, it just didn't cross my mind.

[Elizabeth]

I suspect that comes mostly from those who _want_ to be noticed. An overly 'in your face' attitude could also easily result from a reaction to negative attitudes encountered elsewhere (e.g. the more you're pushed the more you push back).

My personal experience hasn't been with the first category (the ultra-promiscuous or political about their orientation) either. There is certain defensiveness and excessive importance some gays and lesbians seem to give their sexuality that I find irritating, but of course the discrimination they have encountered hasn't been for the most part systemic or institutional so the suffering is much less obvious than with other minority groups. There's also the unique mixing of gender roles which may be a well-spring of creativity but can also make for unexpected social behaviors and mannerisms. At least I'm certainly more accepting of Japanese men, for instance, relaxing after a grueling day, who giggle and playfully touch each other than I would be for Americans....

[bossel]

5 is a very badly worded option (which is why I didn't pick it).

"Homosexuality cannot be seen as immoral as it is inborn and not a matter of personal choice"

First of all it is assuming something which is far from known to be true. "Homosexuality is inborn."

There are enough studies to indicate a high prevalence of pre-birth reasons for homosexuality. Inborn does not necessarily mean genetic though, other factors can be the reason (or at least be involved): eg. hormone levels during pregnancy.

Human behaviour is complex & often has complex reasons. Homosexuality may very well be genetical. But maybe the involved genes only become active under special circumstances. Whether sexual abuse may be one of the factors, I don't know. There are scientists who say so (usually these seem to be psychologists or psychiatrists, hmmm...). Fact is, we still don't know for sure, how homosexuality originates. What we know pretty sure is that it is (in almost all cases) not a matter of choice.

Secondly it's a false linkage. Do things necessarily become moral if you have an inborn desire to do them? What of people who are born without the normal capacity to develop a conscience? Is a psychopath not immoral in his actions because they result from an inborn difference? (Obviously I am NOT suggesting homosexuality is psychopathic - I'm just pointing out a flaw in the logic).

Good point, but do we need morals to judge? I judge on the danger someone poses to others. A psychopath doesn't necessarily pose a risk, neither does a homosexual. As soon as anyone harms somebody without consent (I have no problems with eg. SM) or endangers the well-being of others it becomes a case for the authorities.

As long as there is no harm, the authorities should give people as much freedom as possible & grant rights & priviledges equally.

[CC1]

maybe some of you can explain this to me! (forgive my ignorance please)

Some people say that being gay is not a matter of choice...Does this mean that many gay people are saying that "I don't want to be gay, I would rather be straight, but I can't help it!"??? That concept doesn't make much sense to me...

anyone?

[Lina Inverse]

5.+7. for me.
I think homosexual tendencies are already determined pre-birth, but the enviroment in which the individual grows up also has much influence on wether these tendencies are lived out or suppressed.
Just like Maciamo I feel a little uneasy about gays (much less about lesbians), but there's absolutely no reason to limit their rights in any way

[bossel]

maybe some of you can explain this to me! (forgive my ignorance please)

Some people say that being gay is not a matter of choice...Does this mean that many gay people are saying that "I don't want to be gay, I would rather be straight, but I can't help it!"??? That concept doesn't make much sense to me...

anyone?

From M-W: " CHOICE suggests the opportunity or privilege of choosing freely <freedom of choice>."

You can't choose your sexual orientation.
You can say "from now on I'm gay" & make love with your own sex (gender). That wouldn't make you homosexual in my eyes though, unless you already had the biological (&/or psychological) disposition of homosexuality, only suppressed for whatever reason (which means you were always homosexual, but didn't [want to] know). Maybe you would understand better, if you differentiate between sexual orientation & lifestyle (although that may not really fit for all cases, either).

[jeisan]

i dont care. gay folks can be married if they want, or not, its their choice, it doesnt matter to me. i generally dont care what people do as long as it doesnt hurt me. if someone feels they need the piece of paper, a legal agreement, to prove their love then thats fine, let them have it. who am i to tell them they cant? besides, why should i care? its really none of my business.

[mad pierrot]

i generally dont care what people do as long as it doesnt hurt me. if someone feels they need the piece of paper, a legal agreement, to prove their love then thats fine, let them have it. who am i to tell them they cant? besides, why should i care? its really none of my business.

Are you a Libertarian by chance?

:)

[Maciamo]

5 is a very badly worded option (which is why I didn't pick it).

"Homosexuality cannot be seen as immoral as it is inborn and not a matter of personal choice"

First of all it is assuming something which is far from known to be true. "Homosexuality is inborn."

Polls reflect opinions, not established thuth, otherwise, quite a few options are contradictory.

While it is certain that there is a significant genetic association it is not the case that if you're born with the same genes as someone who is gay / lesbian you will also certainly be gay / lesbian. If grow up to be not gay and your identical twin grows up to be gay - was that difference established in the womb? At 1, 5, 10, 15 years old?

Tests have shown that identical twins have a higher chance of being gay if their twin is gay (although not 100% because social pressure can incite something not to "become" gay, although that is the way they naturally feel. That is called repressed instinct.) But by "inborn" I didn't mean genetical. These are 2 different things. "Genetical = in the DNA", while "inborn = present at birth". The theory is that the mother's hormonal level plays an important role on the sexualization of the brain during pregnancy. This has nothing to do with genes. And unequal repartition of hormones between the 2 foetuses might explain differences (not just for gayness) between identical twins.

Secondly it's a false linkage. Do things necessarily become moral if you have an inborn desire to do them?

No, the other way round. It cannot be immoral if you haven't chosen it. The point is that if homosexuality is inborn, people can't really decide whether to become gay or not. They can only decide to repress their instincts.

Is a psychopath not immoral in his actions because they result from an inborn difference?

I have never heard of psycopathy being inborn, but if it can be proven, that would make them mentally handicaped, and therefore play in their favour if they commit some crimes.

In fact much that I view as moral consists of controling ones impulses and desires in the face of the needs, feelings and mores of others.

With this logic it seems that the only immoral gays are those who repress their homosexuality, as they divert their impulses and desires in an unnatural way.

So, should homosexuality not be viewed as immoral? YES.

See above.

Anyway, eventhough I think your logic is twisted, this is a poll, and therefore not all options should be logical or the way you see it, otherwise I would have deleted anything including the word "sin" or "immoral" as IMHO these are very subjective concepts based on personal feelings and that defy all rational logic.

[No-name]

Are we going to get scientific about this?

In the nature vs. nurture argument- I don't see convincing data either way- although why would I? since I don't as a vocation study human sexuality. Perhaps someone with actual background in behavioural sciences could enlighten us. Why does this matter anyway?

According to our High School text and 20 year old memories of Intro to Psych, our sexuality, including sexual preference is some combination of inherent trait and nurture. (Although I wouldn't swear by the veracity of this info.)

Morality however is not a scientific concept. What we value, what we hold good or evil, how we as a society define the parameters of normal human behavior through laws and rules and morals- this had little to do with science. All over this forum we continually explore the overlap of science and politics and religion: Homosexuality, Stem cell research, evolution, the existence of God, even the purpose of life.

I think we get into trouble when we believe our religion to be science or our science to be religion.

[Winter]

All over this forum we continually explore the overlap of science and politics and religion: Homosexuality, Stem cell research, evolution, the existence of God, even the purpose of life.

I dont understand why that is considered sacreligious, or inept from decent morals. Can someone explain?

[Fantt]

Thanks Sabro. You just said pretty much what I would have said.

You mean Stem Cell research, Winter? Some people are against stem cell research because some interesting investigations require the use of embryonic stem cells which are harvested from non-viable embryonic cells. Some people do not wish to see a distinction between non-viable human embryonic cells and fully alive, out of the womb human beings.