The 'gay vs the Bible' debate......

Why do you say yes? Joking, I hope.

 

what is the difference? thieves allow their compulsions to take over or not. homos do the same.

 

half and half.

if you want something you are not suppose to have and you obsess about it until you act, then what is the difference?

anal sex is a crime in most states. robbery is a crime in most states. so?

 

If a person who lusts after the wrong someone is an adulterer in his heart, I'd say someone who wants to rob a bank could be a thief in his heart. That's not to say having thoughts of such things condemns you. I'd say it's a matter of dwelling on those thoughts without trying to overcome them. If you're not acting on them out of fear of getting caught or a sense of guilt, I'd say the attitude is still "sinful." A sincere struggle to overcome the desire itself, rather than simply refraining from the behavior, would indicate "repentance" to me.

True homosexuality, on the other hand, is not a learned behavior. It is an inborn trait. The desire is not merely sexual; it is the desire for pairing & companionship as well. A homosexual who for some reason couldn't perform sexually would still desire the companionship of a same-sex partner. Immoral behavior is learned, acquired behavior.

I consider a condemnation of a basic human need--that of pair bonding--cruel & unfair. If God himself actually created the human race, & his creatures are born with this need, I'd call that a deeply cruel cosmic joke. That is one fundamental concept of the Christian bible that I can't accept. To require a re-learning & changing of attitudes is a positive thing. To require a complete denial of a basic need most certainly is not.

I'd also reiterate that any sort of sexual behavior can be learned without changing one's basis needs & desires. For example, an essentially gay man can certainly spend many years in a hetero relationship, including diverting sexual desire toward women, by not accepting his basic nature. That effort is, IMO, due to the same sort of psychological illness & dysfunction that might lead any person into any sort of dysfuntional sexual relationships, & cannot lead to real fulfillment.

I spent many years in dysfunctional sexual relationships springing from my own psychological illness, which was caused by abuse & faulty learning. The illness was not "my fault," but I had the means to overcome it through treatment. The fact that I am a basically heterosexual woman was not something I chose to learn in that process, though. It is a basic component of my nature.

In just the same way, a person whose basic nature is heterosexual can be psychologically scarred in such a way as to compel them to seek comfort & acceptance in homosexual relationships. That is not true homosexuality, & the treatment of the illness itself can lead to changes in those desires--just as my desires to seek comfort & needs that were not basically sexual needs in inappropriate, unhealthy relationships with men were overcome.

I'm not concluding that, based on Abinedeb's posts here, he is or is not homosexual. We can't know that based on no more "evidence" than that.

 

[The fact that I am a basically heterosexual woman was not something I chose to learn in that process, though. It is a basic component of my nature.






AK,

Weren't you considering posting an internet dating ad as a woman seeking another woman..because you could go either way? Seems like I remember reading that..lead me to start a thread about Bisexual marriages.

 

Originally Posted by slydevl
Does not acting on my desire to rob a bank mean I am still a thief?


If he merely thinks about robbing a bank and doesn't act upon it, he is not a thief. IMO

 

So you are saying straight men have to fight the desire to be with other men sexually?

Is being able to fight that desire what makes the difference between heterosexuality and homosexuality?

Do you have to fight the desire?

Maybe I have this whole homosexual thing wrong.

 

So you're saying that someone who has been tempted to steal things his entire life, but never actually stole anything is still a thief?

 

I'm saying everyone has a temptation that leads them to stray.

some people have problems with alcohol....some with stealing.....some with hookers.....some with homosexuality.....

back to the thing I tried to bang home to you in another thread.....sin is sin is sin....doesn't matter what it is and yes if you are tempted by your human nature to steal and you dwell on it and think about doing it and getting away with it, then you have sinned.....sinning in the heart is no different than the act to God.

Recovering drunk, recovering clepto, recovering homo.....what's the difference?

 

That's a Biblical standard, and within that context, I'd probably agree.

Depends on who's doing the condemning.

Agree with the latter, but disagree with the former. It's not a sin to be tempted. It's a sin to indulge the temptation. But again, we're blurring the line between Biblical and societal standards.

I agree it's not a learned behavior, but respectfully disagree that it's an inborn trait. I attended a secular clinic on homosexuality a couple of years ago, and the position they presented was that homosexuality was an outcome of a dysfunctional dynamic between parents and children up to the age of approximately 4. This early stage of life is when children's sense of sexual orientation is developed through their interaction with their parents. This made more sense to me than any other theory I had heard before (or since), so until someone comes up with a discovery that trumps it (like a specific gene pattern), I will probably continue to adopt that position.

Totally agree.

Careful. 'Immoral' is a very subjective label.

If homosexuality is a genetic trait, I would agree with you. It would be the equivalent of someone born crippled to be condemned for not having legs.

Don't know if I agree. 'Going through the motions' or 'fake it until you make it' is a philosophy I've never really agreed with in most cases. Regarding a complex dynamic like sexual orientation and attraction, I'd be even more reluctant to agree.

It could be argued that one's 'nature' is a highly psychological part of his or her self, and thus can be modified through therapy.

Another thought to keep in mind is that women and men view sex very differently, and are fulfilled by it in differing ways.