Rev. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY, said last Friday that he thought that homosexuality was biological, and he supported in utero medical interventions to prevent it.
How do other Christians respond to these statements?
Are surgical or medical interventions reasonable to prevent other "sins?" (For example, requiring single people to take depo provera or other hormones to reduce sexual urges, or sedating parshioners who accept evolutionary theory.)
^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^
2007-03-16 10:16:30 · 14 answers · asked by NHBaritone 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
It seems that at least some Christians are catching up with the science (which is admittedly in very early days). Given Mohler's response, though, I'm not sure I don't prefer them ignorant.
It's very difficult to argue about sexual preference with people who can't decide whether homosexuality is a moral failing or a clinical disorder, because the ground keeps shifting.
It is, of course, neither.
If someone chooses to make use of a medical intervention to try to alter their own behaviour or identity there are significant (but not insuperable) ethical issues about whether clinicians should comply.
It's a very different case when such intervention is a result of pressure by a third party.
2007-03-16 11:52:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I believe it is either genetic or some type of hormonal exposure that happens in the womb. I do not believe that people just one day "choose" to be gay.
As for the Christian aspect, is not one of the main tenets of the religion that God, and the bible, are divine and infallible?
Attempts to "cure" gayness in the womb seems to me as though some feel that God has made a mistake and that humans must correct God's mistakes.
How can humans say that they know better than God and attempt to fix God's mistakes?
Many of the biblical exhortations that I have seen put forth by Christians start with, or include, "Paul said". Perhaps it was Paul who had such an objection to homosexuals and not God.
2007-03-16 11:07:33 · answer #2 · answered by Dee 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Rev. Mohler has entered into the ground of eugenics. He should re-assess his situation and his statement.
As a Catholic, I can say that homosexuality is not a sin. Homosexual *acts* are sins. Each person is accountable for his acts. There is no surgery for that.
2007-03-16 10:35:46 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I asked about that a couple nights ago and most that answered, even christians found what he said to be disturbing.
It's a shame that people feel they have to change the natural order of things. People are people and should be accepted for what they are and not what one would wish them to be.
I think anything introduced to people to suppress 'sin' in that manner is highly unethical.
2007-03-16 10:29:58 · answer #4 · answered by genaddt 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe it. We are a fallen race racked by the results of sin. it is no different than the fact that it has been proven that obesity is hereditary. As far as the rest of his comments, I'll have to take a pass.
2007-03-16 10:20:25 · answer #5 · answered by Mr. E 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He must have grabbed the wrong script that morning. His punk rock son must have left one of his magazines beside pops jesus stuff.
Why not just cut out the clitoris, or torture gay people?
Oh that's right Christians already did all that stuff. Damn those screwy liberals for messing with their good time.
2007-03-16 10:20:16 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is absolutely no evidence that homosexuality is biological, genetic or cogenital. But even if it were, so what? So are hemophilia, Down Syndrome, and a host of other abnormalities. "Natural" doesn't mean "normal". And those suffering from this disorder would still have to avoid the immoral behaviors they are drawn to because of the disorder, regardless of the origin of the disorder.
.
2007-03-16 10:23:23 · answer #7 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
A homosexual orientation is not a sin, but it is a disorder, so why would we not want to correct it, if possible? Are we not asked, "who would CHOOSE to be gay?", implying that it is an undesirable condition?
2007-03-16 10:35:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
How do we respond? We are just agreeing with what the gay groups have said for years...that is is biological....
Is it???
Or Isn't it???
2007-03-16 10:26:05 · answer #9 · answered by Eartha Q 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
what bothers me more than anything is that people treat homosexuality as a disease, something to be cured.
2007-03-16 10:31:54 · answer #10 · answered by tandypants 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋