Since homosexuality directly affects an individuals ability to reproduce wouldn't it have been eliminated?
Is homosexuality just another sexual perversion and therefore subject to objective morals?
Just askin'.
2006-09-16 13:07:08 · 28 answers · asked by george_the_cat 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
According to the Word of God, Homosexuality is an Abomination and a Sin, therefore it is a conscious choice, only in the sense that all mankind is born into sin can it be argued that one is born Gay.
All mankind is born with the propencity towards sin, however due to God granting us free will we also have equal propencity towards Him whether we ever reach acknowledgement of that or not.
Each man has a place in His heart only God can fill, no matter what we try and fill it with.....
2006-09-16 13:14:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 10⤋
Medically homosexuality is a perfectly normal form of human sexuality, not a sickness or a perversion. Further, counter-intuitive as it may seem, societies with a high homosexuality rate always have a higher birth rate than those that do not. Lastly, there is no such thing as "objective morals", morality is whatever anyone wants to point to when they use the term, i.e. It's moral to do the things I approve, any I don't approve of is immoral. That makes morality about the most subjective thing there is.
2006-09-16 14:41:10 · answer #2 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What is a homosexual if not the product of a heterosexual union?
As for sexual perversion... you should have realised by now that the sexual aspect is only one part of the whole state of being. As this state of being is an anathema to you, how can you possibly be objective about it? Just as I cannot understand why people would "limit" themselves to finding love among, exclusively, one gender...
It doesn't fit with your mores ergo it is a perversion of the norm, in your eyes - that's subjective, BTW.
2006-09-16 13:31:00 · answer #3 · answered by unclefrunk 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
organic decision is alive and nicely. think of roughly it. you're attracted to somebody and get married. you have young little ones. you have reproduced and the Human Race is going on! organic decision will paintings the comparable way if the fowl flu is as undesirable because of the fact the doom sayers are looking forward to. maximum folk won't get the meds and various people will die. those that are hardy adequate will proceed to exist and bypass our genes directly to the subsequent era. it rather is a fallacy to think of that organic decision continuously chooses the main important and maximum efficient. It chooses what works suitable at that 2nd in time. Being a carnivore like T-Rex replaced into powerful till the plant eaters died off. The runts (mammals) had the earnings whilst the dinosaurs have been long gone and have been "chosen".
2016-12-12 09:38:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
George, my suspicion is that there is a biological element to sexual orientation in the human species (either through genetics itself or via sex hormones effect on the developing fetal brain). There always seems to be a tendancy for a certain percentage of the human population to be predominantly gay.
The biological benefits to the species might include: Taking out a certain % of people from the reproduction cycle to prevent overpopulation; stress reduction during times of great turmoil when not enough opposite-sex partners were around; having a certain % of the population not reproduce but still act in nurturing the young.
When gay persons say that they have no choice in their sexual orienation, they are not lying to you. The only choice they might have is not to physically act on their urges (as John Paul II suggested) and that is not possible for the vast majority of people.
God did not create all humans as heterosexuals. Some believe that bisexuality is actually the default orientation and that homosexuality and heterosexuality are learned. In my opinion there is a great interaction of both biology and social forces that result in sexual orientation in humans. And some of these social forces emminate from parents themselves, including those parents who identify themselves as Christians and Jews.
A good number of the people who sit around you at church are actually bisexual or homosexual in orientation. It really is none of anyone's business who they are, by the way. And you would be shocked to find out how many who sit by you have homosexuals or bisexuals in their family trees, including that of your pastor.
Eliminating gay people would not eliminate homosexuality or bisexuality. For the most part, the people producing and rearing non-straight kids are straight themselves.
2006-09-17 09:15:35 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are a lot of things that might affect a persons ability to procreate including stupidity....ugliness...or disabilities and they all seem to manage it. Homosexuality isn't passed down in a family..it is a preference. And who gets to decide what morals are and who they affect and refer to. I have known many gay people who live good lives and never hurt or bother others and many so called straight people who are creeps...either drunks or wife beaters or child abusers.
Just tellin'
2006-09-16 13:16:16 · answer #6 · answered by dragonrider707 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I've always thought of it as nature's way of controlling the population. But some animals practice homosexuality, some type of monkeys. No its not a sexual perversion and its not subject to morasl. Unless your a religious crazy person.
2006-09-16 13:12:35 · answer #7 · answered by Raziel 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Nope. That would suppose for you to be gay, your parents had to be gay. That is not the case. No one said that homosexuality was a dominant genetic trait. Go back to class little twit.
Your supposition is nothing more than an attempt to interject a flawed understanding of genetics to justify bigotry as some form of moral standard when it is not.
Just tellin' you.
2006-09-16 14:45:31 · answer #8 · answered by IndyT- For Da Ben Dan 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Romans and Egyptians practiced in homosexuality without a stigma attached, and that was a long,long,long time ago. Also "Alexander The Great" had a butt-buddy and a wife & kids,he kicked all kind's of ***! I'm sure if you check your gene-pool there's bound to be someone that is or was gay if not yourself, you seem a little homophobic?
2006-09-16 13:32:29 · answer #9 · answered by CROC DADDY 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's plain to see that Natural Selection missed you too. How often to you think about homosexuals? Do you like Gladiator movies. Do you think Tom Cruise is kind of cute? Just askin'...
2006-09-16 13:46:11 · answer #10 · answered by donronsen 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Maybe gayness is sort of natural selection...think about it...if you took all the millions...cause there are millions of homosexuals on the planet and told them ok now you are straight....think of the over population problems that would cause...
that should be the gay motto....
We are here and gay so you can have children.
2006-09-17 10:38:15 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋