|
|
Re: Banning people who sat banning Gay Marriage is NOT the Answer is not the answer(Score: 1) by Arthegarn on Dec 19, 2005 - 08:22 AM | OK, let’s begin with the beginning.
So we have these people who believe homosexuality is a disease and treat homosexuals like sick people. We also have the fact that these people treat sick people kindly.
So what’s the problem?
Sorry, Artesque, but I can’t see it. Everybody is entitled to an opinion as long as they don’t try to force their opinion into other people. They are not mistreating anybody, hurting or harming. What’s wrong? They have a different set of values and beliefs and to them is just as obvious that homosexuality is a disease as to you that it’s not. Why does a system of beliefs that leads these people to treat homosexuals kindly make you sick? I guarantee you all those people who think I am going straight to hell because I am a Roman Catholic and would like to see me embracing the One True Faith (meaning theirs) don’t make me sick, Actually I thank their kindness, their good intentions, and the fact that they keep to their businesses and let me keep to mine.
If you think that homosexuality is a disease there can be no arguing that Jesus would have loved them and tried to heal them. He loved ant tried to help sock people. I can’t see why is that idea revolting.
I don’t understand why is it selfish to wish that sick people heal and recover. If you really think homosexuality is a disease, hoping gays to become straight is the good thing to do, and hoping them to remain sick is the evil thing to do. Period
You say humans are not born homosexual. False. While it is true that not all gays were born gays, it is not true that no gay was born gay. There are three basic reasons why a person develops homosexual behaviours: 1) That person has natural (meaning genetic) homosexual tendencies (meaning that has genetic characteristics, be them inherited or the result of a mutation, that makes that person feel sexually attracted to members of the person’s same sex instead of the opposite) 2) Being a genetic heterosexual, that person has willingly decided to go over hir natural inclinations and develop a homosexual conduct, be it occasional or permanent. 3) Being a genetic heterosexual, that person has suffered any of a number of possible traumas that have made him develop, unwillingly or unknowingly, a homosexual tendency. Any of the true sources is possible for any given case; trying to say that any one of these explanations explains all cases is an oversimplification that leads to an oversimplified (=often wrong) behaviour.
So, with all due respect, I believe your idea about all homosexiuals “chosing to be that way” or “following their hearts” is wrong as often as not.
When homosexual conduct is the result of a trauma, as stated in 3), the person displaying a homosexual conduct does not do so willingly nor as an act of freedom. These people could, and should, be restored to their own, natural, free selves so that they can later make a free choice about their sexuality. Just as all genetic homosexuals who deny themselves their condition and force themselves to act as heterosexuals, meaning they exhibit a “straight” behaviour out of a different kind of trauma, one much more frequent than the one we are discussing, should first be brought to accept theiir natural tendencies so then, knowingly and willingly, they can make a similar choice.
I am a religious person. I need God to tell me the difference between right and wrong because God literally wrote the book on right and wrong. Of course, that doesn’t mean that I am a bloody idiot that lets some other bloody idiot tell him what he says God says is right or wrong. Including St. Paul. You don’t think Jesus would “love & care extra, for homosexual individuals, to drag them into heterosexuality”? That’s fine with me. You think Jesus “would love & accept them just like he does to everybody else”? That’s fine with me too. If I don’t find your beliefs, no matter how different from mine, revolting, why do you feel others’ to be so? .
You say that “being homosexual doesn't make one a freak, abnormal, disgraceful, or ungrateful.” Before we get to the bottom of it... would you kindly define “being homosexual”? Being born homosexual? Choosing to behave homosexually even though you were born heterosexual?
You say that “not all people need to accept homosexual individuals”. But those who think homosexuality is a sickness, even though they might accept homosexuals as they accept the deaf or the blind make you sick. That doesn’t compute.
You ask what makes homosexuals different to those evangelicals. Well I am not an evangelical but I can give you a clue of what they might think: there is good and there is evil, there is sin and there is virtue. Homosexuality is clearly damned in the Old & New Testaments (even though Jesus never said a word about it) so homosexual behaviour is sinful. If you also think, as you seem to do, that all homosexual come from the 2nd way, they are all knowingly and willingly behaving sinfully, just as if they lied or killed or spat on a cross. These behaviours, always following that line of thought, are not to be tolerated in the Community, much less encouraged. A sinner is a sinner and must be made see the fact that he is a sinner if he wants to join a religious community.
I think you are being overly simplistic and condemning people who have different beliefs from yours, but who would treat different people kindly and pray that they get to their senses. I think your attitude is at least as bad as that of those who, when talked about the rights of homosexuals, feel about to vomit all over the place, then roll around in their own vomit while throwing up even more.
Arthegarn
|
|
|