Cutlass
The Man Who Wasn't There
Registered: 02/04/04
Posts: 77558
Loc: U.S. of A.
Quote:
Quote: There's never been the tiniest shred of evidence that sexual orientation has any element of choice
There's never been any rock-solid evidence of a so-called "gay gene", either. Besides, people who practice homosexuality do leave it, and go on to a very happy heterosexual life. It is possible, and it does happen; the public at large just isn't told about it.
People can act straight, but that doesn't change the sexual preference they were born with. just as men in prison often chose homosexual sex, but revert to straight upon release. Again, actions are choice, orientation is not.
Registered: 06/08/06
Posts: 734
Loc: Dallas, TX, USA
Orientation of any kind, be it sexual or otherwise, is motivated by choice, not the other way around. In order to make any kind of voluntary response, you first choose to make that response in your mind and/or heart. This relates directly to the age-old facts of "cause and effect". The cause in this instance would be a desire to pursue sexual relations outside the heterosexual forms. That desire then leads to an action, which in turn produces another action, etc., etc. Same goes with the reversal. It's like the simple fact of responding to hunger. Your stomach growls, so you make the choice to get up, go the to fridge, and retrieve something to eat. Same principle, different action.
The desires for both food and sex are ingrained in us as individuals, and they are always the same from one moment to the next. What differs is our choice of response to that desire. If you crave sexual relationships, you have two primary choices: heterosexual or homosexual. Your choice of response is motivated by both emotion and choice. As for bisexuality, it is my belief that people who practice it are simply trying to avoid the choice. They don't know what to do, so they decide, in effect, to do nothing. They bounce back and forth, never making any concrete decision for one or the other. It is above all, a choice, and it is one that we all face, sooner or later. I personally believe homosexuality and bisexuality to be completely inappropriate in any form, but as this is a free country and an open message board, I will not hate those whose opinions differ, but I'm not afraid to state my beliefs, either...just like anyone else that's here.
_________________________
"And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that in all things at all times, having all that you need, you will abound in every good work." ~2 Corinthians 9:8~
Quote: Orientation of any kind, be it sexual or otherwise, is motivated by choice, not the other way around. In order to make any kind of voluntary response, you first choose to make that response in your mind and/or heart. This relates directly to the age-old facts of "cause and effect". The cause in this instance would be a desire to pursue sexual relations outside the heterosexual forms. That desire then leads to an action, which in turn produces another action, etc., etc. Same goes with the reversal. It's like the simple fact of responding to hunger. Your stomach growls, so you make the choice to get up, go the to fridge, and retrieve something to eat. Same principle, different action.
The desires for both food and sex are ingrained in us as individuals, and they are always the same from one moment to the next. What differs is our choice of response to that desire. If you crave sexual relationships, you have two primary choices: heterosexual or homosexual. Your choice of response is motivated by both emotion and choice. As for bisexuality, it is my belief that people who practice it are simply trying to avoid the choice. They don't know what to do, so they decide, in effect, to do nothing. They bounce back and forth, never making any concrete decision for one or the other. It is above all, a choice, and it is one that we all face, sooner or later. I personally believe homosexuality and bisexuality to be completely inappropriate in any form, but as this is a free country and an open message board, I will not hate those whose opinions differ, but I'm not afraid to state my beliefs, either...just like anyone else that's here.
I understand your point, but I don't buy it. Sexuality may be a chosen response to a desire, but you cannot choose that initial desire, and thus you can't choose your sexuality.
_________________________ ~ Zooey Deschanel ~ Taylor Swift ~ Emma Stone ~ Kristen Bell ~ Alison Brie ~ Victoria Justice ~ Jenna Fischer ~ Amy Adams ~ Amber Heard ~ Evan Rachel Wood
Registered: 12/28/04
Posts: 9662
Loc: In a country with no army =)
Quote:
Quote:
Quote: There's never been the tiniest shred of evidence that sexual orientation has any element of choice
There's never been any rock-solid evidence of a so-called "gay gene", either. Besides, people who practice homosexuality do leave it, and go on to a very happy heterosexual life. It is possible, and it does happen; the public at large just isn't told about it.
People can act straight, but that doesn't change the sexual preference they were born with. just as men in prison often chose homosexual sex, but revert to straight upon release. Again, actions are choice, orientation is not.
People are also born with a tendency towards cancer, towards asthma, towards leukemia, towards heart disease, towards depression. When someone is born with these characteristics, we say they were born with a DEFICIENCY, a PROBLEM, and we try to correct it.
Just because a person is born with a homosexual tendency, it doesn't mean it is normal. That fact proves nothing whatsoever about whether or not sexual inclination is set at the moment of conception. It's a moral problem, not a genetic one.
However, we were discussing Scientology.
_________________________ Crushingly Beautiful (tm) Ladies - (as of March 31st, 2013)
The Devils Left Hand
Son of the Morning
Registered: 12/12/04
Posts: 18702
Loc: Αἵδης...
I don't know when this thread turned from a good ol' fashion religious bashfest to a debate on sexual orientation. To put things to rest, I'd like to (on this rare occasion) say that I agree with Cutlass on the sexual orientation issue. You can lie to yourself and pretend to be something, but that does not change your natural inclinations.
But I digress, this debate (if you can call it that) is really about Scientology and why it is a target for ridicule. And even more so, why someone who hates religion as much as the original poster does, he would also try and defend it. I think that ALL religion is a target, particularly by the scientific sector. This is the great travesty in modern living. The great travesty is that science always tries to hold faith up to it's standards. And people of faith always try and justify their beliefs through pseudo-science. I think that when you try and hold a believe up to scientific rigor, it will always fail. And vice versa. Why we choose to compare the two, however, I will never understand. Clearly they are separate things.
But when someone of science tries to hold matters of faith up to their standard, the matters of faith always break down. The more fantastic the religion, the more easily it is discarded. Scientology is one of the easiest because it's premise is based wholly on science fiction. That's why it is an easy target.
If you really want substantive change, you have to convince both sides to quit trying to validate or invalidate the other. Once religious people quit trying to use science to validate their cause (which never works), and science quits trying to invalidate religion, both sides can look at each other and recognize their differences. If a person wants to believe in magical bearded men, let them. If a person wants to believe that the universe was born through a singular cosmic orgasm, likewise let them. To each their own.
That being said, I think that most people would not be opposed to religion if there was no business behind it. I think that the real intolerance (on my part too) kicks in when church's are being run like businesses. When normal human beings appoint themselves into positions of power. That is why I always say that I am against 'organized' religion and not against religion itself. It's the corporate mentality of faith that causes problems. A persona alone, believing in fantastic things is not a threat. That is another reason why Scientology is such a threat to people. It is a pyramid corporate entity. Any religion that can turn a profit is going to be a target.
I had an extremely tough time keeping up with the debate in here, since it jumped from scientology to religion to faith to sexual orientation to genetics and blah blah blah...I come from an entirely different background, scenario, situation and I am not going to spill my waffle here. But in all seriousness, DLH has provided with the most intellectual and thought-provoking conclusion {if we are putting this to rest} to this debate. I completely agree with him.
Previous Topic
Index
