Homosexuality - Why do people still care?

[pyroknight]

I have to agree with the idiocy of the current US military policy. My wife was in the Air Force and has told plenty of stories of sexual exploits that she either participated in or knew of while she was serving. I have other veteran friends who have related similar stories. If you are not going to require everyone to be celibate, then what difference should their sexual orientation make?

If you have individuals who commit sexual discrimination, sexual harassment, or some other infraction, that is what courts martial are for. Prosecute the offenders and let those who confine their sexual exploits to a private setting do as they wish. Merely mentioning a sexual preference is ridiculous grounds for discharging someone from the military.

[Ridryder 911]

4. The last interesting point made, was that if you believe in God (and all that title entails), is that God either created homosexuals or that he "made a mistake". If God created homosexuals, he in turn wants them to be scorn against and even put to death (under his physical words). If God simply "made a mistake", well then that opens a whole other can of worms, regarding the paradox of omnipotence, etc... How does an all powerful God (all knowing, all seeing, always there) simply "make a mistake"? Doesn't sound like any God that I want twiddling his fingers around me. Don't even bother with the "free will" arguement...

You may not want to be bothered with free will, but that is what always gets you roughed up. First, whomever said God make mistakes is wrong. It is not God's will for anyone to sin or go against his will and teachings. It is a recognized choice that one makes, as well as asking for forgiveness of going against those teachings. I feel as many do many homosexuality affairs is usually a choice not always genetic or "born that way", I do believe some are from possible scientific and medical reasons and that is a different point. Remember, it was not that long ago it was considered a mental illness. I and like so many others, feel the increasing practice is because the new label of being "cool" and is a new fad.

Just because it is "generally" and socially accepted does not always make something right. There is right and wrong, no matter of what the situation maybe. Even scientifically, for one that agnostic or atheistic and believes in evolution, it would be against the laws of nature.

VS EH, again you are stating wording of those times as actual of today, instead of the intent on reciting the Ten Commandments and you know it. As many attempted to justify slavery in the past times of misquoting and misinterpretation of Biblical scriptures. The times, intent and wording has to be closely regarded when interpreting scriptures. That is why Christians are encouraged to study and research and understand what was going on at the time.

p.s I still pray for ya!....

R/r 911

[Michael]

Problem with homosexuals? No, not since any of them stopped approaching me for sex as a teenager, which was very unpleasant. I suppose in one way less unpleasant though than for teenage girls hit on by hetero-lechers, because I at least had the defense, beginning in my own feelings, that I didn’t swing that way and didn’t want to. Had homosexuality been (even) more fashionable in my day, perhaps I would have been seduced. Glad I wasn’t.

Problem with homosexuality? Not practically, in the sense that it doesn’t present an impediment to my friendships or working relationships. I have enough to police in my own irregularities before worrying about others’. A few gay friends have given me profound and delicate ethical guidance, including guidance in personal relationships, unsurpassed by heterosexuals’, including my own, insight. They also hold virtues I lack, so my condemning can await my own prior perfection.

But I can’t honestly say I find their condition optimal, and I’m not sure deep down, ie, even discounting the inconveniences of societal disapproval, they do either. I easily imagine some of them happier as, and making wonderful, husbands and fathers. The gay women I know, if they’d been treated better by men, I feel analogously about. But this is just my unscientific imagination of an unrepresentative sample. My sense—and it’s only a personal sense—is that if a rigid machismo weren’t imposed on growing boys, and if instead, say, sensitivity to the whole spectrum of human emotions were seen as no less “manly” than, say, athletic and military prowess, some boys might not feel prematurely compelled to adopt a restrictive personality-category whose profile is defined by those outside it. A growing person's developing sexuality is notoriously mobile and subject to influence; I’d like to see it left alone longer altogether.

My sense is also that power plays a large role in homosexual relations—Lord knows, not that it doesn’t in heterosexual ones. But the natural potential for resolving opposition into fruitfulness—literal, biological fruitfulness—can (doesn’t always) more easily “redeem” the egotism and mixed motives that are ingredients of what draws people together. Domination corrupts exchanges, whether hetero- or homo- or hierarchical or familial or political. In my view, shaped I will admit by a Jewish upbringing and a Christian conversion, there is a natural order of the body (as in you don’t put pizza in your nose) and between the sexes that permits creative breathing—not unfrought with difficulties—limitedly found with someone structurally like oneself. Though as to Scripture, it’s not always obvious when religious direction was speaking to its time or to the human condition. St. Paul wrote that “women should remain silent in the churches,” and there are other injunctions and prohibitions in the Bible that are universally disregarded by both Jews and Christians.

Our sex-obsessed popular culture, and our competitive larger culture, place pressures on growing individuals that over-invest the threshold to sexual self-definition. It’s easy to imagine homosexuality as at least sometimes and at least in part a retreat from the abyss of the unknown Otherness of girlz or boyz. And in many cases, particularly among young women, abuse from boys or men makes such a retreat perfectly understandable. I don’t know whether this is true of all cases. Some gay friends have told me of knowing their orientation since preschool. If I were really strict in my thinking, I’d hold (at least to myself) that that could and should be treated like an orientation to, say, laziness or gluttony. But I wouldn’t know how to replace homosexual inclinations by heterosexual inclinations the way laziness can be replaced by willpower and gluttony by restraint. And again, I don’t see the usefulness of preaching to others so long as I’m unqualified by my own shortcomings.

A historian I know has proposed that homosexuality recurs typically as a forerunner of tyranny. It’s controversial whether the tension homosexuals carry, often visible in their emotional “body armor,” is intrinsic to their erotic attitude or is a predictable defense against psychological oppression, gross or subtle, by the majority.

And speaking of tyranny, on the subject of spousal benefits and licenses I’d like to see less gummint regulating people’s lives altogether. I understand the intimate association we traditionally hold between culture and law, and that parents who want their children unrecruited (which doesn’t happen through tracts) expect the gummint to support them. I’d like to see more communities shaping their lives without state-imposed boundaries, and that people influence others through sincere persuasion rather than (eg state) force. Now, since it’s difficult for me to imagine two gay persons engaging to be married who have been entirely chaste with each other, let alone virginal, whereas I find that a normal image for a heterosexual couple, I wonder to what extent sincere persuasion operates in the initiation of such partnerships. But maybe my mind is stuck in clichés. Here are some more. Good question!

[somedic]

Pyroknight: You must be so proud of your wife. Has she thought about going professional?

Gays in General: I see no need to treat to harm people because they are gay. But on the other hand I see no need to normalize abnormal behavior. (Man receiving man)

I've read a long time ago that Hitler condemed gays to death camps as well as jews. Id say the tolerance gays enjoy today is as good as it gets. The tactic of over exposing society to gays on TV, internet, etc to the the point that the shock value wears off is working. Its so hip to say" Im ok with it" or "Im fine with it."

Somedic

[akflightmedic]

Pyroknight: You must be so proud of your wife. Has she thought about going professional?

Gays in General: I see no need to treat to harm people because they are gay. But on the other hand I see no need to normalize abnormal behavior. (Man receiving man)Somedic

Yeah I couldnt think of a witty comment about his wife so I left it alone knowing someone else would pick up the slack...LOL.

Anyways, Somedic you reminded me of another point that I want to make...thanks.

Several times it was mentioned about "putting something in someone's bottom" and now "man recieving man". This is the typical hangup when discussing this topic. It always comes down to man on man sex and that is usually the response most guys will give when discussing this. They will contort the face and say that is just nasty and wrong. But the second you talk about lesbians, or see lesbian porn/pics whatever, its all about "hell yeah, I am all over that!"

So why the double standard? Why is it not as repulsive or disgusting when its two women instead of two men???

Michael....great post and great link to the article. Well spoken as always.

In that article I did find it funny when it was comparing gays and lesbians and their military desires. I see this every day here. The Army has a HUGE number of lesbians and they are all well respected and tolerated (here at my camp). As far as effiminate men or even men that "acted" gay, I have only seen a handful and they were all Navy guys. Ironic??

Now I know there are gay men in the Army, AIr Force and quite possibly even the Marines (sarcasm), but they sure as hell do not show it and I am sure with good reason.

This war is going to change many things and I think one of those willbe the acceptance of gays being allowed to be gay in the military. One major reason for this, which is personal observation from the various camps I have been at here, is the fact that so many weekend soldiers have been activated. In their normal lives, they are "out" and live their lilfe as they should. Now their unit is activated and they must conform and hide themselves 24/7 in these close quarters. Some of them have just said "fuck it, I am who I am and if they dont like it they can send me home." With the military already having to stretch to get adequate numbers to fight this battle, it just isnt prudent to start discharging over sexual orientation.

Sex is not allowed on any of these camps over here. Yes, it happens but it isn't allowed due to General Order #1. There are married soldiers but they are housed together and are the exception. Hetero and homo sex just is not allowed and if caught you will face discipline actions.

ANyways, great topic, lots of great responses and thanks for keeping it civil thus far.

[Scaramedic]

Since AK broke the whole lesbians and how men love watching them I'm betting if these two ever make a sex tape y'all will be first in line.

Right behind me!!!

Heartbreaker

Peace,

Marty

[Michael]

Why is it not as repulsive or disgusting when its two women instead of two men

a) Heterosexual men are aroused by exposure to women's sexuality rather than by men's sexuality.

Viewing multiple organisms supplies an increase of stimuli over viewing a single organism.

c) The visual field presents no distractions by competitors real or imagined.

d) Viewing the debauchery of those with whom one identifies less [ie, individuals of the opposite sex] is more appealing/less dismaying than viewing the debauchery of those with whom one identifies more [ie, members of one's own sex].

Proof of the disrespect (or, if you will, deficit of compassion) that is an ingredient to the heterosexual voyeur's imagination is that a man would likely react to pornographically identifying public images of members of his own family in a fashion similar to that of pornographically identifying members of his own gender. The urge to protect the first may differ from the urge to withdraw from the second, but both images evoke an impulse to practice the Golden Rule in place of the reflex to exploit the vulnerable. /sermon (Amen.)

[emtpsaveu911]

I am a Christian, and I believe that homosexuality is a sin. I put homosexuality in the same category as heterosexual sex outside the marriage bed, be it adultery or fornication. God ordained sexual union between one man and one woman, through the bonds of marriage. The Bible mentions homosexuality throughout the old and new testaments and places it in the same category as adultery. I agree that homosexuality has been around since the fall, so has every other sin man can commit. I treat a gay person like i treat everyone else, I do not have to condone or agree with the sin, but I will love the sinner. As I have no reason to dislike or even hate someone because of their sin, for a sinner saved by grace am I.

As previously stated, marriage is ordained by the church and the government should not be telling churches whom they can marry. Nor should the church be told by the government as in what the church can teach or having to condone things that conflict with the doctrines and the Bible. I think that the same rules that apply to a man and a woman whom are unmarried should apply to homosexual couples, it the realm of legall and medical decisions.

In my opinion, the person chooses this, the same as one chooses to cheat on his/her spouse, have premarital sexual relations, steal , murder, ect. God created us with a free will, the freedom to choose, and we will choose to either do what, or follow God's laws.

In short, I see no need for any special classification any more different than anyone else. Homosexuals are still male and female, young and old, and deserve the same respect as every other human life. The issue of tolerance should be a two way street, there should be a tolerance to the level you not have to agree with me, yet should be willing to return the respect that your views are receiving.

I couldn't have said it better myself. Good post.

Vs eh- i didn't vote due to the wording of your poll question. Do you have a problem with Homosexuals? I don't have a problem with the person, it's what they are doing I don't agree with morally. But like ffemt said its like any other "sin" to me i'm not here to judge or to hate. Maybe if you worded it Do you have a problem with homosexuality? Love the sinner hate the sin.

BTW-i am also just a sinner who is saved by grace everyday

[nursenae]

Because as a Christian......God says it is wrong.The end, enough said.But also as a Christian we all sin and each person will pay for their sins.

[Asysin2leads]

Give me one Christian that follows every single word of Leviticus, and then I'll listen to the self righteous grandstanding. Until then, its just another case of someone trying to convince others that what they believe is the word of God.