eeny meeny miney moe

[Nicole M]

should I be gay? or p'raps heter-o?

 

I'm joking, but only about my own confusion. I really don't understand how sexual orientation could be considered a choice. And I am asking in all earnestness for some clarity about the thinking behind this view. Especially since Colleen has familiarized herself with the other line of thinking, it seems only right that I should do the same with this one.

 

My own experience did not include a moment when I pondered, hmm...? men...? or women...? men...? or women? let's see... I think I'll go with... men! yes that's it! men! And my own brother, who is gay, would say the same -- that moment never happened for him either.

 

Also, what's the deal with "lifestyle" please? My brother identifies himself as gay, but has not had a relationship for a decade or more and does not "see" men or "date". He goes to work, he walks his dog, he goes to movies. I don't see anything "gay" about his lifestyle. His lifestyle looks quite like mine would, were I not married with children. So does that mean he's not gay right now because his "lifestyle" does not include another man? What about heterosexual single persons or even married couples who are celibate? Are they practicing a heterosexual "lifestyle"?

 

And again, I am asking earnestly because I would like to understand the choice and lifestyle thinking. Are there medical or scientific theories of human development that support this notion that we choose and that our sexual orientation is a lifestyle?

 

Thank you in advance for any insight you have or resources you could recommend.

[Michelle T]

I have not seen any medical/scientific research on homosexuality finding that sexuality of any persuasion is a choice or lifestyle decision. Most research into homosexuality seems to be finding that there are some structural brain differences, and hormonal differences at work.

 

However, for those who have religious beliefs defining homosexuality as a sin, the idea that it's a choice or lifestyle is usually strongly held.

 

I've personally never been able to see how anyone would "choose" to belong to a group that is so hated, persecuted, and discriminated against. But then again, I don't believe in the bible as literal, or take it to be a science textbook, history textbook, or psychology textbook.

Michelle T

[PrairieAir]

I have not seen any medical/scientific research on homosexuality finding that sexuality of any persuasion is a choice or lifestyle decision. Most research into homosexuality seems to be finding that there are some structural brain differences, and hormonal differences at work.

 

 

Could you point us to some of that research?

[Nicole M]

 

However, for those who have religious beliefs defining homosexuality as a sin, the idea that it's a choice or lifestyle is usually strongly held.

 

Michelle T

 

So has this idea come mainly out of the Christian community then, the lifestyle / choice view?

[Kathleen in VA]

Oh, boy, am I crazy or what? All right - I'm jumping in on this one.

I don't think it matters whether it is one's tendency or one's choice. The Bible condemns homosexual acts (along with murdering, fornication, gossiping, being disobedient to parents, and a whole host of other things). Yea, I know, not everyone cares what the Bible has to say about it. Oh, well. I do.

 

God made the world. He made human beings. He knows best how the whole thing should work. Isn't that true about people who invent things as well? I mean, if you made it, you should be an expert on how it functions. Seems logical to me. He made gravity and when you disobey the laws of gravity - generally speaking - it hurts. It is just the way things are.

 

God said that homosexual acts are a sin. He never mentions homosexual tendencies. I think He must have a good reason to prohibit that behavior. Since He is a loving God and He knows best how everything is supposed to work and He wants what is best for everyone, He made a point of saying which behaviors are destructive and which ones aren't.

 

Personally, I have tendencies to be overly critical and angry. Acting on those tendencies has always proven to be destructive. Choosing God's way of forgiveness, tenderness, patience, etc. has always proven to be constructive.

 

The Bible says that Satan is a murderer and wants to destroy God's creation. He is very subtle about it. He isn't going to show up on your front stoop dressed in a red suit with horns on his head and pitchfork in his hand. He wants to entice every person on this planet to do the exact opposite of what God wants because He wants to destroy it. And, yes, I know, not everyone thinks Satan exists. That doesn't stop him though - it actually suits his purposes.

 

I think sin is sin. It is sin because it is disobeying God. It is saying, "I know better than God," which is essentially saying "I'm smarter than God" or worse yet, "I should be God," and the ultimate, "I am God, so therefore I will decide how to live my life."

 

I am absolutely and 100% aware that this is not a popular pov and it is totally politically incorrect. Nevertheless, I believe it is true. Like my sig says, you don't have to believe something for it be true.

 

God loves us and wants what's best. He wants us to trust Him. He wants us to say, "OK, you made the world and everything in it so I believe your laws are for my good. I will obey them because I trust in your goodness and love."

 

The Bible says if you have committed one sin, you are guilty of them all. The bottom line is we all need to repent of whatever sin(s) we have committed and cry out to God for mercy through His son Jesus Christ. I need a Savior just as much as anyone who has committed a homosexual act or has murdered another person or has stolen anything, etc. etc. The world is messed up and offers no hope. Jesus is our hope. Without Him, we are all deserving of condemnation.

 

When I lose my patience and yell at my kids I've never gotten away with saying, "It's just the way I am. You are just going to have to accept me this way and allow me to rant and rave as much as I please, because this is just me. I can't help it." Nope. Doesn't work. I think the same is true for all sin. Just because we have a strong desire to do something does not make it right. Feelings cannot be trusted. We need something outside of our experience to use as a standard for behavior - not so we can beat other people over the head when *they* don't meet that standard. Oh, no, no, no, no! We need it because it is our "user's manual" - it is the truth about who we are and who God is. Feelings change. God does not. His word does not.

 

What everyone needs to do is be more concerned with what God wants and not so concerned with what *we* want. Again, He made it all. Shouldn't we try to find out what He made it for and how we fit in it? Shouldn't we want to do what's best for ourselves and who would know better what that is than the God who made us?

 

And fwiw, I am *not* homophobic. I am not afraid of homosexuals or gluttons or any other kind of sinner for that matter. I do not like labeling people by their individual sins. Sinners are sinners and sinners need Christ. We are all sinners and we all need Christ.

 

OK, I'm done (really!).

[Old Dominion Heather]

However, for those who have religious beliefs defining homosexuality as a sin, the idea that it's a choice or lifestyle is usually strongly held.

 

 

 

I disagree with you. : )

 

My religion holds that sexual acts outside of marriage between a male and female are by nature sinful acts.

 

I see this issue along with all sexual acts outside marriage as being sinful acts, just like all other sinful acts of commission...for example: gluttony, drunkenness, promiscuity, lust, etc... and lets not leave out all the sins of omission: failing to love God with all my heart, mind, and strength and to love my neighbor as myself, etc...

 

My religion also holds that "All have sinned". I certainly have, so has my dh, my kids, my parents, etc...

 

But the choice to actually commit an action, is a choice. I choose not to cheat on my husband. He chooses not to cheat on me. I chose to cheat on an exam in college; something I then chose to make right with the prof.

 

We choose the things that we do, and that is why most religions that view homosexuality as a sinful lifestyle see it as just that, a lifestyle that is chosen.

[Renee in NC]

Does the Bible ever call homosexuality a sin? Or is it just the homosexual act?

 

Is the choice really whether to act on those feelings or not (instead of whether one is attracted to the same gender or not?) Meaning, if one is only attracted to those of the same gender, then the choice is whether to act on those feelings rather than remain celibate?

 

And this is not just a Christian idea (that homosexuality is sin) - it is a sin in the Jewish and Muslim beliefs as well, correct?

[Nicole M]

Does the Bible ever call homosexuality a sin? Or is it just the homosexual act?

 

Is the choice really whether to act on those feelings or not (instead of whether one is attracted to the same gender or not?) Meaning, if one is only attracted to those of the same gender, then the choice is whether to act on those feelings rather than remain celibate?

 

And this is not just a Christian idea (that homosexuality is sin) - it is a sin in the Jewish and Muslim beliefs as well, correct?

 

I am curious about this, too. I genuinely do not understand how the act / tendencies distinction meshes with the "lifestyle" designation.

[Renee in NC]

Here's a link to a wiki article about various religions and their stances:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_and_homosexuality

[Old Dominion Heather]

My belief, and I am a Christian, is that it is the act. When the Bible mentions homosexuality, it mentions it in reference to the act or those who are participating in the act.

 

Actually all sin, except for a sin nature, is considered a choice/act.

 

 

ETA: I am running out the door to a birthday party. I'll check back later.

[H.S. Burrow]

I wasn't going to weigh in but here goes:

 

I am a Christian and I agree with the OP. The Bible says in Matthew 7:1-2 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." I don't believe that everyone makes a choice whether to be heterosexual or homosexual. I believe that we are how we are made.

 

The link below is to an article on birth defects. Specifically birth defects of the gentials.

 

http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Birth_defects_ambiguous_genitalia?Open

 

For children born with this type of birth defect, the parents and doctors must make a choice....and they may make the wrong one.

 

I personally do not believe that homosexuality is a birth defect and that is not what I am trying to say. I am just presenting material that shows that sometimes people's brains are not wired the same as their bodies.

 

My point in all of this, we don't know God's plans, only He does. And we are not to sit in judgement of others.

[Michelle T]

Could you point us to some of that research?

 

http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/science/May-June-08/Homosexuality-is-Biological--New-Research-Suggests.html

 

Start here, it gives links to a variety of research articles.

Michelle T

[Michelle T]

So has this idea come mainly out of the Christian community then, the lifestyle / choice view?

 

I'm not getting into a debate on what comes down to opinion/worldview/religious outlook.

Michelle T

[Nicole M]

I'm not getting into a debate on what comes down to opinion/worldview/religious outlook.

Michelle T

 

 

sorry. not trying to start a debate, only asking where this idea comes from.

[Nicole M]

My belief, and I am a Christian, is that it is the act. When the Bible mentions homosexuality, it mentions it in reference to the act or those who are participating in the act.

 

Actually all sin, except for a sin nature, is considered a choice/act.

 

 

ETA: I am running out the door to a birthday party. I'll check back later.

 

okay. so, really, I'm trying to understand. is the choice then only about how we act on our orientation, the direction of our desire? if it's the act that is a sin, and individuals who chose not to act on their sexuality identify themselves as homosexual, are they still living a "lifestyle", based on their self-identification?

 

I still don't understand the lifestyle part. how is that defined?

[Scarlett]

My point in all of this, we don't know God's plans, only he does. And we are not to sit in judgement of others.[/color][/size][/font]

 

We dont know all God's plans certainly. However, we do know God's feelings about homosexual acts. He is very clear on it.

 

We don't have to act on every desire we have. An alcoholic decides whether or not to drink alcohol or not. For some recovering alcoholics, abstaining from alcohol is the hardest thing they've ever done and many if not most can't do it without assistance of some sort.

[Scarlett]

okay. so, really, I'm trying to understand. is the choice then only about how we act on our orientation, the direction of our desire? if it's the act that is a sin, and individuals who chose not to act on their sexuality identify themselves as homosexual, are they still living a "lifestyle", based on their self-identification?

 

I still don't understand the lifestyle part. how is that defined?

 

I don't define it. The first part of your post is correct, except that orientation makes it sounds like God made different models or something. A sexual desire toward same sex is a perversion of what God intended between men and women.

 

I think there might be a great many people who have never married because they didnt' feel drawn to the opposite sex and/or felt drawn to the same sex. They don't necessarily announce these feelings to the world...they just live their life as a single person---a single and celibate person.

[Doran]

Feelings change. God does not. His word does not.

 

 

Kathleen, I very much appreciate the conviction with which you express your p.o.v. here. I have one question: is it assumed that through all the many translations of the Bible, down through the ages and all the linguistic evolutions which the text has undergone, that we still end up with the same meanings for the same words? Rephrasing, are there standards which have been changed or which have evolved to better suit "modern man", or are the rules the same over and over and over? I ask with sincerity. I have never studied the Bible on that level and am unsure how that works.

[Nicole M]

I don't define it.

 

hold on now! you don't define it, or won't? :001_smile:

 

again and again the term "homosexual lifestyle" is throw around. isn't it fair to ask what that means?

[sdWTMer]

Kathleen, I very much appreciate the conviction with which you express your p.o.v. here. I have one question: is it assumed that through all the many translations of the Bible, down through the ages and all the linguistic evolutions which the text has undergone, that we still end up with the same meanings for the same words? Rephrasing, are there standards which have been changed or which have evolved to better suit "modern man", or are the rules the same over and over and over? I ask with sincerity. I have never studied the Bible on that level and am unsure how that works.

 

Doran, if I'm understanding you correctly...

 

To really get the true meaning of words and contexts you can go to the Hebrew language for the Old Testament and Greek for the New Testament. I think that newer translations may take a lot of liberties. Is that what you're asking? :confused:

[Nicole M]

Kathleen, I very much appreciate the conviction with which you express your p.o.v. here. I have one question: is it assumed that through all the many translations of the Bible, down through the ages and all the linguistic evolutions which the text has undergone, that we still end up with the same meanings for the same words? Rephrasing, are there standards which have been changed or which have evolved to better suit "modern man", or are the rules the same over and over and over? I ask with sincerity. I have never studied the Bible on that level and am unsure how that works.

 

 

Thank you, Doran. I wonder this as well. I was thinking about the fact that the very word "homosexual" was not even a part of our vocabulary until the late 1800s. Your question articulates more clearly what I was struggling to understand.

 

And, Kathleen, thank you for taking the time to share your view/s.

[bkpan]

for we all have tendencies and inclinations that are unique to who we are, but we don't all respond the same way to the temptations that we face.

 

What is so often left out is the high level of woundedness in the gay community. When I was in my early 20s I was part of a support group for homosexuals who were wanting to live as heterosexuals. A dear member of my family had determined that she was gay and left her family to follow her heart. I was wounded by this decision and wanted to understand her. The group was led by two former homosexuals who were now married to each other. They were so open about their struggles and the temptations that they felt, but that their love of God and their family kept them diligent in their commitments.

 

Do you know that EVERY one of the members of this support group had suffered some form of sexual abuse?? I am a firm believer that the vast majority of "gay" individuals have been wounded in the area of their sexuality at some point in their life. There are, of course, exceptions who may not be able to "explain" why they are attracted to members of their own sex, but that doesn't mean that they are powerless to do anything about it. I had so much admiration for the folks in this group and for how hard they were working to live their convictions. God did a great deal of healing in my own life through that group.

 

Anyhow, the Christian believes that we are made in His Image, and therefore we are so very much more than our feelings and emotions. There are many testimonies of those that have been healed. And there are many others who struggle with their "cross" for a lifetime, but persevere out of their love for their Lord. And others who have been convinced that they have been born this way, and therefore are powerless to do anything about it.

 

I think that is unfortunate. And that it is not a loving response to tell a homosexual that they can never change. Many would testify that is false.

 

So, I know that this is also a very unpopular opinion. But I believe so completely in God's love and incredible mercy (which I am grateful for every day as I need it desperately!!), and His love for every sinner. Certainly not picking out the homosexual as some worse sinner above others. Hardly.

 

When I receive the Eucharist each week, I pray for God's forgiveness for sinners, OF WHOM I AM CHIEF. I have much compassion for those who struggle with sexual temptation. I have plenty of my own temptations to grapple with as well.

 

Kim

[Sugarfoot]

Here's my viewpoint, which is, by default of who I am, Catholic:)

 

I think the difference between homosexuality and a homosexual lifestyle is that one is part of who you are, just like being heterosexual, and the other is what you do. No one knows for sure what causes homosexuality, but that in itself doesn't preclude a person from being a Christian. It's the lifestyle that some choose to live--same-sex marriage/sexual relationships--that go against (at least my church's) precepts. For heterosexuals, sexual relationships outside of marriage also go against those precepts.

 

Having said that, there are plenty of people, homosexual and heterosexual, who live a perfectly normal, celibate life.

 

This is a difficult thing to express. I hope I've done it without being offensive in any way.

[Scarlett]

hold on now! you don't define it, or won't? :001_smile:

 

again and again the term "homosexual lifestyle" is throw around. isn't it fair to ask what that means?

 

 

It is not a phrase or term I use. It is the act that is the sin. Of course, a thought if dwelled upon can give birth to sin...but just being attracted to the same sex is not the sin.

[RebeccaC]

Kathleen, I very much appreciate the conviction with which you express your p.o.v. here. I have one question: is it assumed that through all the many translations of the Bible, down through the ages and all the linguistic evolutions which the text has undergone, that we still end up with the same meanings for the same words? Rephrasing, are there standards which have been changed or which have evolved to better suit "modern man", or are the rules the same over and over and over? I ask with sincerity. I have never studied the Bible on that level and am unsure how that works.

 

 

This is the Greek word used in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy is Arsenokoites (arsenokoiteß) which means, one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual. The word Malakos (malakoß) is also used in 1 Corinthians 6:9 which means; soft, soft to the touch metaph. in a bad sense effeminate of a catamite of a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man of a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness of a male prostitute.

 

In 1 Corinthians 6:9 you have both words which is why the NAS which is closest to the original language translated like this,

1 Corinthians 6:9

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,

 

My father helped a bit with the translation of the NAS. I grew up hearing the Bible read first in the original language and then translated by my dad. I am not an expert but I know a bit.

 

HTH but maybe I was miss reading what you were asking.

[Kathleen in VA]

Kathleen, I very much appreciate the conviction with which you express your p.o.v. here. I have one question: is it assumed that through all the many translations of the Bible, down through the ages and all the linguistic evolutions which the text has undergone, that we still end up with the same meanings for the same words? Rephrasing, are there standards which have been changed or which have evolved to better suit "modern man", or are the rules the same over and over and over? I ask with sincerity. I have never studied the Bible on that level and am unsure how that works.

 

Doran, this is an excellent and valid question. The answer is one that has been discussed at great length in many books and I fear is beyond my scope to answer. I do think that it is possible for God to preserve His word and I would add that many of the "translations" out there today are mere paraphrases and are inaccurate at best and heretical at worst. Modern man is in essence no different than ancient man or medieval man or an other man in history. The Bible is timeless and does not need to change and adapt to suit different ages in history. I think you have to be very careful which version of the Bible you choose.

 

I can direct you to two books that I think cover help on this topic (Bible translations):

 

Choosing a Bible by Leland Ryken

The Doctrine of the Word of God by Thomas A. Thomas

 

The first is a free pdf download; the second is a link to a bookstore because I couldn't find it online free anywhere, but it is relatively inexpensive.

 

I would just say that taking the Bible as a whole, you would see that God considers marriage between a man and woman to be the biblical norm - that's what He instituted in the Garden of Eden. In the NT I think that homosexuality is referred to as acts that are not in keeping with what is "natural." Again, I just think that God made a "normal" sexual union and that is between one woman and one man, the point of which was for procreation as well as pleasure. Fwiw, I think the early patriarchs were wrong to dismiss God's model of Adam and Eve and have more than one wife.

 

He designed it this way for His purposes and He gave us His word to help us live our lives for His glory. I really believe that God set this world up to work according to His design. When we choose to go against that design we are courting trouble. It's like putting water in your car's gas tank. It just doesn't work. Your car was not designed to run on water.

 

We really need to set our emotions aside and try our level best to determine what God has to say. I believe He wants us to know Him - that was the whole point of writing the Bible in the first place. If we are humble and are willing to accept His answers we can pray and ask Him to guide us through His word. We can ask Him to open our eyes to His truth. Try to set aside any preconceived notions and just ask Him to teach you the truth through His word. Then read it with an open heart. He means it for our good, not to be a killjoy. He wants us to live full, loving, beautiful lives - we just need to be willing to set ourselves aside and truly seek Him.

[Laurie4b]

Human sexuality is a very complicated response and it is very improbable that it is an "all this or all that" response. For instance, there is evidence that there are some genetic or biological markers. One is that having an older brother come ahead of you in the womb increases the probablility that you are a gay male, even if you are adopted (so it isn't a birth order thing; it's an exposure to hormones in the womb thing.) Now almost any genetic/biological trait has an environmental component to it. For instance, schizophrenia has a strong genetic component, but identical twins have only about a 50% probablility of developing schizophrenia if their twin has it.

 

With human sexuality, there is a lot that could influence ultimate orientation if one is biologically wired one way or another: trauma due to sexual abuse, seduction, exposure to certain kinds of pornography, etc.... all these influence how sexuality is played out and expressed among any one of us. Some of those environmental influences may not be choices: eg abuse, but some may be: what we participate in, choose to look at, etc. Of course, any particular sex act is a choice on our part unless we are forced into that act.

 

Here's the thing that currently boggles my mind re: "choice." . It seems quite hypocritical to me. Situation A: a person is born with a male body, has got Y chromosomes, and yet internally "feels" like a woman. There is no ethical prohibition about a physician operating on him to give him a body in line with what he feels internally. Situation B: a person is born with a male body and has got Y chromosomes and is attracted to the same sex, but doesn't want to be. His desire is in line with his body, but the professional organizations are increasingly against attempting any type of treatment in line with what the client says he wants. (I've used male gender to be simple here.) In the first case, medicine will help the person become who he wants to be. In the second case, medicine and psychology are moving to a position of paternalism that says, "You don't really know what you want. We know better than you and will not attempt to treat you." That makes no sense to me. Even if current treatments are not effective, that doesn't mean that there isn't possible treatment to be developed. So people who feel "caught" in their sexual orientation are denied the right to self-determination and told that "professionals know best" while others who feel "caught" in the wrong gendered body are given the right to self-determination. That, imo, is systematic discrimination.

[PrairieAir]

Doran, if I'm understanding you correctly...

 

To really get the true meaning of words and contexts you can go to the Hebrew language for the Old Testament and Greek for the New Testament. I think that newer translations may take a lot of liberties. Is that what you're asking? :confused:

 

Do you mean newer translations or newer versions? There is a big difference between a translation and a version. Some of the newer versions are what I've seen often take a lot of liberties.

[Kathleen in VA]

I think there are biological markers for violence and anger as well. I think this may be why God says that every person is born a sinner - because we have actual biological tendencies to want to commit sin. This is an effect of the fall of man in the Garden of Eden. That is why God said, "As surely as you eat of the tree you shall die." He meant that death would begin its work in us. And don't we see that? Just look in the mirror. I see wrinkles, gray hair, bad teeth and I feel my body giving way. The whole universe was affected by this fall.

 

I think as science continues to do more research in this area we will find that we are all biologically predisposed to some destructive behavior or other. I think my family is predisposed to addiction. All four of my grandmother's children - my mother, her twin sister, and their two brothers - suffered from alcoholism and drug addiction.

 

The Bible says that when we become Christians we become "new creatures." I wonder if that means there is an actual biological change in our DNA or something. Wouldn't that be amazing?! Of course, it also says we carry the remnant of the "old man" with us until we get to heaven - which I think is perhaps our habits of behavior - our so-called "baggage."

 

Certainly if God created us, he could recreate us. It is all very fascinating to me. But I would just say a word of caution. Just because we may be predisposed to something does not mean it is ok - if we follow through and act on that predisposition it is still sin.

 

This all reminds me of Romans 7 where Paul is describing his struggle with wanting to do the right thing, but doing the wrong thing anyway. "O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? I thank God - through Jesus Christ our Lord!" His conclusion is in Romans 8:1, "There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit."

 

This is the glory of salvation. I cannot save myself. All my efforts at self-reformation are in vain. It is only through Christ's righteousness that I have any hope at all. His payment for my sin is what I place my faith in - not my own goodness. He is my only hope. He is the world's only hope.

[SusanG]

Here's the thing that currently boggles my mind re: "choice." . It seems quite hypocritical to me. Situation A: a person is born with a male body, has got Y chromosomes, and yet internally "feels" like a woman. There is no ethical prohibition about a physician operating on him to give him a body in line with what he feels internally. Situation B: a person is born with a male body and has got Y chromosomes and is attracted to the same sex, but doesn't want to be. His desire is in line with his body, but the professional organizations are increasingly against attempting any type of treatment in line with what the client says he wants. (I've used male gender to be simple here.) In the first case, medicine will help the person become who he wants to be. In the second case, medicine and psychology are moving to a position of paternalism that says, "You don't really know what you want. We know better than you and will not attempt to treat you." That makes no sense to me. Even if current treatments are not effective, that doesn't mean that there isn't possible treatment to be developed. So people who feel "caught" in their sexual orientation are denied the right to self-determination and told that "professionals know best" while others who feel "caught" in the wrong gendered body are given the right to self-determination. That, imo, is systematic discrimination.

 

It's not discrimination - modern medicine and psychiatry simply don't view it as an illness or defect to be attracted to the same sex, so there is no need for treatment. I would dare say that 99% or more of individuals that are looking to be "cured" of homosexuality are doing so for religious reasons - and there are many religion-based "therapy" centers that claim to assist with such matters.

 

Now to extend your argument - say a straight married woman decides one day she's missing out on part of life by not desiring women. According to your theory, should she be able to also go to a doctor for treatment to render her bisexual or gay?

[Rosie_0801]

Again and again the term "homosexual lifestyle" is throw around. isn't it fair to ask what that means?

 

I'm not sure if it's a very meaningful question. The stereotypical gay lifestyle is all drag queens and promiscuity, but not all gay guys subscribe to this. Just like we heteros don't all have white picket fences and 2.4 children. Regardless of one's views on the morality, there are many different people with many shades of sexuality leading many kinds of lives. Most have pretty basic things in common. People get up, go to work, socialise, eat, call their mothers, procrastinate over housework, etc. There are straight single people, gay single people, straight promiscuous people, gay promiscuous people, straight people with families, gay people with families, straight religious people, gay religious people, straight people hiding their relationships from their families, gay people hiding their relationships from their families, straight people with bad haircuts, gay people with bad haircuts, you get the drift...

Rosie

[PariSarah]

So has this idea come mainly out of the Christian community then, the lifestyle / choice view?

 

Cultures where homoeroticism was common and accepted had no such view. As far as the ancient Greeks were concerned, everyone was bi-. I don't mean to say that orientation doesn't exist, but I wonder whether it would have found such favor as an explanatory theory if we weren't in the middle of a culture which by and large rejects homoeroticism. In any case, the "choice" view is by far the oldest view, and it did not originate with Christianity.

 

As far as current holders of "choice" and "lifestyle" theories, yes, I would say that those who hold homosexuality to be a choice are referring to the acts, not the orientation. Many of them additionally don't believe the "biological" explanation for orientation, but I don't believe that their comments about choice are primarily directed toward feelings, but actions.

 

I'm not sure to what your "lifestyle" question refers, but those who speak negatively about a "gay lifestyle" generally refer to self-avowed, practicing homosexuals. A "gay lifestyle" is one that includes (intentional, consensual) homoerotic acts. Some people are additionally referring to what they consider to be markers of an "alternative" lifestyle--promiscuity, say, or some other outrageous behavior.

 

For what it's worth, my denomination makes an explicit affirmation of the lifestyle of celibate homosexuals and welcomes them into ordained ministry. And it does not make any blanket condemnation of "gay lifestyles" in its denominational literature, and encourages churches to be open to homosexual members even as it continues to affirm heterosexual marriage as the only proper expression of sexuality.

[Old Dominion Heather]

how is that defined?

 

I am not sure that I (or any other person) can answer that question. I can only tell you how *I* define homosexual lifestyle and you can tell me how you define it.

[Heather in Neverland]

Oh, boy, am I crazy or what? All right - I'm jumping in on this one.

I don't think it matters whether it is one's tendency or one's choice. The Bible condemns homosexual acts (along with murdering, fornication, gossiping, being disobedient to parents, and a whole host of other things). Yea, I know, not everyone cares what the Bible has to say about it. Oh, well. I do.

 

God made the world. He made human beings. He knows best how the whole thing should work. Isn't that true about people who invent things as well? I mean, if you made it, you should be an expert on how it functions. Seems logical to me. He made gravity and when you disobey the laws of gravity - generally speaking - it hurts. It is just the way things are.

 

God said that homosexual acts are a sin. He never mentions homosexual tendencies. I think He must have a good reason to prohibit that behavior. Since He is a loving God and He knows best how everything is supposed to work and He wants what is best for everyone, He made a point of saying which behaviors are destructive and which ones aren't.

 

Personally, I have tendencies to be overly critical and angry. Acting on those tendencies has always proven to be destructive. Choosing God's way of forgiveness, tenderness, patience, etc. has always proven to be constructive.

 

The Bible says that Satan is a murderer and wants to destroy God's creation. He is very subtle about it. He isn't going to show up on your front stoop dressed in a red suit with horns on his head and pitchfork in his hand. He wants to entice every person on this planet to do the exact opposite of what God wants because He wants to destroy it. And, yes, I know, not everyone thinks Satan exists. That doesn't stop him though - it actually suits his purposes.

 

I think sin is sin. It is sin because it is disobeying God. It is saying, "I know better than God," which is essentially saying "I'm smarter than God" or worse yet, "I should be God," and the ultimate, "I am God, so therefore I will decide how to live my life."

 

I am absolutely and 100% aware that this is not a popular pov and it is totally politically incorrect. Nevertheless, I believe it is true. Like my sig says, you don't have to believe something for it be true.

 

God loves us and wants what's best. He wants us to trust Him. He wants us to say, "OK, you made the world and everything in it so I believe your laws are for my good. I will obey them because I trust in your goodness and love."

 

The Bible says if you have committed one sin, you are guilty of them all. The bottom line is we all need to repent of whatever sin(s) we have committed and cry out to God for mercy through His son Jesus Christ. I need a Savior just as much as anyone who has committed a homosexual act or has murdered another person or has stolen anything, etc. etc. The world is messed up and offers no hope. Jesus is our hope. Without Him, we are all deserving of condemnation.

 

When I lose my patience and yell at my kids I've never gotten away with saying, "It's just the way I am. You are just going to have to accept me this way and allow me to rant and rave as much as I please, because this is just me. I can't help it." Nope. Doesn't work. I think the same is true for all sin. Just because we have a strong desire to do something does not make it right. Feelings cannot be trusted. We need something outside of our experience to use as a standard for behavior - not so we can beat other people over the head when *they* don't meet that standard. Oh, no, no, no, no! We need it because it is our "user's manual" - it is the truth about who we are and who God is. Feelings change. God does not. His word does not.

 

What everyone needs to do is be more concerned with what God wants and not so concerned with what *we* want. Again, He made it all. Shouldn't we try to find out what He made it for and how we fit in it? Shouldn't we want to do what's best for ourselves and who would know better what that is than the God who made us?

 

And fwiw, I am *not* homophobic. I am not afraid of homosexuals or gluttons or any other kind of sinner for that matter. I do not like labeling people by their individual sins. Sinners are sinners and sinners need Christ. We are all sinners and we all need Christ.

 

OK, I'm done (really!).

 

Wow, can I get an AMEN? I was going to respond at length but I can't say it any better than that. I would only like to add that even if you believe that homosexuality is something you are born with...a chemical imbalance, genetic malfunction, whatever...what CAUSED those imbalances or malfunctions? SIN. There was no death, sickness, disease or genetic mutations until sin entered the world. So it IS possible for me, as a Christian, to believe they are born that way and still think the BEHAVIOR resulting from it is sin. And my brother is gay too.

[TXMomof4]

This is the Greek word used in 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy is Arsenokoites (arsenokoiteß) which means, one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual. The word Malakos (malakoß) is also used in 1 Corinthians 6:9 which means; soft, soft to the touch metaph. in a bad sense effeminate of a catamite of a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man of a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness of a male prostitute.

 

In 1 Corinthians 6:9 you have both words which is why the NAS which is closest to the original language translated like this,

 

My father helped a bit with the translation of the NAS. I grew up hearing the Bible read first in the original language and then translated by my dad. I am not an expert but I know a bit.

 

HTH but maybe I was miss reading what you were asking.

 

Great information Rebecca. I was going to rep you, but apparently I did at some point recently!

 

Thank you so much.

[PariSarah]

Kathleen, I very much appreciate the conviction with which you express your p.o.v. here. I have one question: is it assumed that through all the many translations of the Bible, down through the ages and all the linguistic evolutions which the text has undergone, that we still end up with the same meanings for the same words? Rephrasing, are there standards which have been changed or which have evolved to better suit "modern man", or are the rules the same over and over and over? I ask with sincerity. I have never studied the Bible on that level and am unsure how that works.

 

There is so much variation, across time and across denominations/churches, in how this issue is approached. Some people say that, yes, we have a pretty good understanding of God's word, and yes, it has rules that still apply. Other people say that you need 2000 yrs of church history and tradition to help you understand what God meant when God said what God said, but yes, the Bible has rules that still apply. Still other people say that we've "moved on" from ancient Jewish and Christian ethics, but we still honor what God meant when God said all those old-fashioned things in the bible.

 

Complicate that with the fact that even literalists will interpret something as figurative if they think it "can't possibly" be what God meant, and you have a really wild interpretive situation.

 

That doesn't even get INTO the problem of people and churches being wildly inconsistent in their application of ethical or interpretive principles.

 

There's just no one answer to this question. It really depends on your denomination, your culture, and your century.

[Kathleen in VA]

Great information Rebecca. I was going to rep you, but apparently I did at some point recently!

 

Thank you so much.

 

Me, too, Rebecca. I was going to rep you but it said I had to spread it around. Thanks for the scholarly input.

[Nicole M]

I'm not sure if it's a very meaningful question.

 

 

Rosie, I totally agree with what you are saying about lifestyle. But why is this not a meaningful question? What Collen said on the other thread is this: I understand this pov to be very common, as I have heard this many times.

 

While I don't agree with the choice (yes, I consider it, ultimately, a choice) to lead a gay/lesbian lifestyle....

 

I am simply asking for clarity about what is intended by this, as there seems to be general nodding of agreement, an agreed upon meaning, which I (still) do not understand (despite the many generous attempts to enlighten me).

 

I am still thoughtfully and prayerfully pondering other responses here. Much of the theology that has been laid out in this thread is very foreign to me and does not sing out with meaning that I can grasp and say, okay, that makes sense! I am grateful, however, to everyone who has responded.

[Laurie4b]

So why should modern pyschology or medicine decide? Why not let the person decide? Nobody told Michael Jackson he couldn't change xyz, though nothing he changed is considered a "defect" either. The question is about freedom of choice. I think his choices were rather bizarre, but hey--It's not my face.

 

I don't really think it should be anybody's business to decide that the reason someone has for wanting to change is bogus. So what if for a particular person religious beliefs were the motivation? Do you think that doctors should be in the business of telling people that their religious beliefs don't cut the mustard and that the doctor should decide on behalf of the patient what the patient's life should be like ?

 

What would be your argument against a straight person attempting to change their orientation?

 

Let's change the topic to ADHD. There are a lot of people who view ADHD as a gift. Some people think it's an evolutionary step forward . People with ADHD are often creative. However, many drive themselves nuts and wish they had a different kind of mind. Suppose the APA decides that ADHD is a "gift" and not a "defect" but it's driving you nuts, personally. Don't you think it should be up to the person to decide whether he or she thinks what he or she was born with is an asset to keep, or something to change? Shouldn't the person be allowed to make the decision about whether to give up some creativity for some order in life? A professional should not tell you you have to change, but neither should they dictate that you cannot change.

 

If pyschiatric associations put forth ethics of "client self-determination" and "religious neutrality" for their profession (which they all do) , then it should be applied across the board, to all cases, with an exception for suicide, abuse, or harm to others only.

[Laurie4b]

You're absolutely right. There are biological predispositions to a whole lot of things, crime and addiction included.

[home4school]

Kathleen, I totally agree with your post. It was exactly what I would say if I could get it out right! This brings up an unusual conversation I had with my dsil the other day. Out of the three children my parents had, I am the only straight one. Most of my cousins are not hetero. Hetero is actually the minority in my family! My dsil and I were talking about these Christian ministries that help people to resist their urge to lead an alternative lifestyle and the statement made they were "born that way".

 

I too have always wondered why someone would chose a lifestyle that would put them under such scrutiny and pressure, but as a Christian, wondered why God would create people with those tendencies. She told me about hearing someone speak regarding Paul in the Bible and the "thorn in his side" he speaks about. Some believe he may have been referring to desires toward the same sex. Pretty out there, huh? Have any of you ever heard this? Maybe if that is what he's referring to, it is to be an example of how we are too resist our sinful urges? I don't know. I want to read up on it myself, but I haven't yet. This thread just got me to thinking about it again.

 

Having so many family members that aren't hetero, I often give a lot of thought to "born that way" or "choose to". I absolutely agree with the posts about us being wired for certain behaviors. I have several I have to fight daily to even have a prayer of becoming more like Jesus!

 

My sister and brother have both passed away, so I really guess I'll never know their whole stories. I do have one cousin that I always "supposed" was gay. He never said he was, but....A few years ago he was saved, went to seminary, now pastors a church, and at age 48, is not married and does not date. Something to ponder I guess.

 

Just thought I'd throw that out there....

 

Blessings,

Kim

[Kathleen in VA]

Kathleen, I totally agree with your post. It was exactly what I would say if I could get it out right! This brings up an unusual conversation I had with my dsil the other day. Out of the three children my parents had, I am the only straight one. Most of my cousins are not hetero. Hetero is actually the minority in my family! My dsil and I were talking about these Christian ministries that help people to resist their urge to lead an alternative lifestyle and the statement made they were "born that way".

 

I too have always wondered why someone would chose a lifestyle that would put them under such scrutiny and pressure, but as a Christian, wondered why God would create people with those tendencies. She told me about hearing someone speak regarding Paul in the Bible and the "thorn in his side" he speaks about. Some believe he may have been referring to desires toward the same sex. Pretty out there, huh? Have any of you ever heard this? Maybe if that is what he's referring to, it is to be an example of how we are too resist our sinful urges? I don't know. I want to read up on it myself, but I haven't yet. This thread just got me to thinking about it again.

 

Having so many family members that aren't hetero, I often give a lot of thought to "born that way" or "choose to". I absolutely agree with the posts about us being wired for certain behaviors. I have several I have to fight daily to even have a prayer of becoming more like Jesus!

 

My sister and brother have both passed away, so I really guess I'll never know their whole stories. I do have one cousin that I always "supposed" was gay. He never said he was, but....A few years ago he was saved, went to seminary, now pastors a church, and at age 48, is not married and does not date. Something to ponder I guess.

 

Just thought I'd throw that out there....

 

Blessings,

Kim

 

Hi Kim,

 

Thanks for your encouraging words. I will only say that I believe there is a good reason Paul never specifies what his "thorn in the flesh" is. I think it is ridiculous to speculate about anything at all. It simply isn't necessary to get the spiritual comfort out of his situation to know what his situation was. We all have our own "thorns" and God's grace is sufficient to handle every one of them, no matter what they are. (The second half of I Peter 5:5 says, "God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.") I hope that helps with that anyway.

 

I'm sorry about the loss of your sister and brother, but it is wonderful to hear about your cousin. Thanks for sharing that.

[Scarlett]

Rosie, I totally agree with what you are saying about lifestyle. But why is this not a meaningful question? What Collen said on the other thread is this: I understand this pov to be very common, as I have heard this many times.

 

While I don't agree with the choice (yes, I consider it, ultimately, a choice) to lead a gay/lesbian lifestyle....

 

I am simply asking for clarity about what is intended by this, as there seems to be general nodding of agreement, an agreed upon meaning, which I (still) do not understand (despite the many generous attempts to enlighten me).

 

I am still thoughtfully and prayerfully pondering other responses here. Much of the theology that has been laid out in this thread is very foreign to me and does not sing out with meaning that I can grasp and say, okay, that makes sense! I am grateful, however, to everyone who has responded.

 

 

 

While I can't speak for Colleen as to what SHE meant, I understood her particular comment to be referring to those actively participating in homosexual sex. I would think lifestyle refers to a way of life. For instance, my BIL lives a Harley lifestyle. That would have little meaning if he only sat around in his living room FEELING like he'd like to be out on the open road on his bike. I think lifestyle denotes actions. YMMV.

[Scarlett]

Kathleen, I totally agree with your post. It was exactly what I would say if I could get it out right! This brings up an unusual conversation I had with my dsil the other day. Out of the three children my parents had, I am the only straight one. Most of my cousins are not hetero. Hetero is actually the minority in my family! Kim

 

I too am sorry about your siblings.

 

I think your family (and I'm sure there are others like yours) would make a fascinating case study! I am always interested in what makes people tick...but I guess in the end, what it all comes down to is that we are responsible for our actions. Who do we (the collective we) allow to set the standard for us? If we decide we will follow the standard set by God, then that is what we have to do even when it is not easy. However, he does give us help to overcome our inherited sin and he will never let us face what we can't bear.

[Rosie_0801]

Rosie, I totally agree with what you are saying about lifestyle. But why is this not a meaningful question?

 

I'm not saying it's not a question worth pondering, I'm suggesting it's a question not worth dwelling on. The gay lifestyle and the hetero lifestyle are not things that come in wrapped in clearly different and seperate packaging. If that's what you are looking for, you aren't going to find it. As I explained in my last post, it's more the same than different. Everyone does much the same thing, just gay people share their life with someone of the same sex and us heteros share ours with someone of the opposite.

With everyone's point of view, you are getting food for thought (lots of it, lol!) even if you don't get the answer you're looking for.

:)

Rosie

 

Edit: Was just talking to dh about this, and he queried as to whether you were asking about lifestyle or gay or lesbian culture. Not all gay or lesbians are part of this culture, but there certainly is a cultural aspect to it all.

[Nicole M]

I'm not saying it's not a question worth pondering, I'm suggesting it's a question not worth dwelling on. The gay lifestyle and the hetero lifestyle are not things that come in wrapped in clearly different and seperate packaging. If that's what you are looking for, you aren't going to find it. As I explained in my last post, it's more the same than different. Everyone does much the same thing, just gay people share their life with someone of the same sex and us heteros share ours with someone of the opposite.

With everyone's point of view, you are getting food for thought (lots of it, lol!) even if you don't get the answer you're looking for.

:)

Rosie

 

Edit: Was just talking to dh about this, and he queried as to whether you were asking about lifestyle or gay or lesbian culture. Not all gay or lesbians are part of this culture, but there certainly is a cultural aspect to it all.

 

 

To be honest, I personally do not understand homosexuality to be a lifestyle choice, nor do I have a sense of heterosexuality being a lifestyle choice. I indicated something to this effect in my original question. However, that term is used frequently when certain folks discuss homosexuality, and I wondered what they meant by it. My main objective here is to understand the pov of persons who understand homosexuality to be a lifestyle choice. I have read and re-read the comments from several posters and am still wrapping my head around what they mean.

 

We're building a garage (!) so I haven't had time to give a thoughtful response to everyone who has posted here, but I have been thinking about it all day, and will respond when I have the time and energy to do it right.

[Peela]

I'm not saying it's not a question worth pondering, I'm suggesting it's a question not worth dwelling on. The gay lifestyle and the hetero lifestyle are not things that come in wrapped in clearly different and seperate packaging. If that's what you are looking for, you aren't going to find it. As I explained in my last post, it's more the same than different. Everyone does much the same thing, just gay people share their life with someone of the same sex and us heteros share ours with someone of the opposite.

With everyone's point of view, you are getting food for thought (lots of it, lol!) even if you don't get the answer you're looking for.

:)

Rosie

 

Edit: Was just talking to dh about this, and he queried as to whether you were asking about lifestyle or gay or lesbian culture. Not all gay or lesbians are part of this culture, but there certainly is a cultural aspect to it all.

 

:iagree: with Rosie.

And I dont think you are going to get a clear answer.

My gay BIL is in a long term monogomous relationship, has told my dh they don't engage in what people traditionally think of as gay intercourse, he considers himself a Catholic, he has been very involved in church based charity endeavours, has a job that involves caring for disabled people....he is pretty ordinary. In the country town where he now lives, the people actually think they are just brothers living together- there are no other gay people there.

How does one catagorise them? Can't they just be people? If every now and then they go o a gay festival, does that mean they are living a "gay" lifestyle? If half their friends are gay and half are hetero, does that make them half living a gay lifestyle?

 

I must admit I am taken aback, again, by the people who are so darned certain that they know exactly what the God they believe in, who apparently loves them more than the rest of the world who don't believe in Him, thinks about homosexuality. That kind of certainty is such a dangerous thing. I prefer the "love thy neighbour" and the dont judge everybody else approach, myself. Well, thats the kind of world I prefer to live in, anyway.

[Mom to Aly]

should I be gay? or p'raps heter-o?

 

I'm joking, but only about my own confusion. I really don't understand how sexual orientation could be considered a choice. And I am asking in all earnestness for some clarity about the thinking behind this view.

:iagree:

I agree completely! Why would someone choose one of the most difficult things to be these days? People are killed over this! Maimed over this! And, if it is a choice, why do people kill themselves because they are gay, and feel they can't change it and can't live with it? Why do people enter into heterosexual marriages, only to reveal themselves years later, destroying many lives along the way, but unable to continue with the charade?

 

I don't know, if I wanted to make a life changing choice, I, personally, could find one that was much easier on me. There are so many gay people who wish they weren't--for those of you who feel it is condemned by the Bible, do most of you have good friends who are gay? I do! And many are very happy as they are--but many are not. I have one whose parents kicked him out when he was 15 because he finally got the courage up to tell him. He has tried to kill himself 3 times. He grew up in a Southern Baptist family, and now claims he is agnostic, but I know deep down he isn't--he has been addicted to drugs for years, living with men off and on, or living on the streets, pretty much anyone who will take him in and support him for a while, and he'll call me once in a while, when he is really drunk or really high, crying that God doesn't love him, that he is a sinner and should never have been born, would have been better off dead--everything his parents said before his dad beat him with a kitchen chair he broke over his head and back, then locked him, unconscious, outside of his house, and never let him back in.

 

Sorry, very big emotional thing for me. Anyway, as I said, I have many friends who are happy in their lives, but I doubt I have many who, honestly, wouldn't have chosen a different path at one point or another, if they had had that choice.

[5kidsforME]

I must admit I am taken aback, again, by the people who are so darned certain that they know exactly what the God they believe in, who apparently loves them more than the rest of the world who don't believe in Him, thinks about homosexuality.

 

Please, please, Please, do not think all christians feel this way. I am a born again, evangelical christian and I most certainly know that God does not love me MORE than the next person. Please don't let one misguided christian make you think that ALL christians feel this way, we don't.

[Peek a Boo]

I must admit I am taken aback, again, by the people who are so darned certain that they know exactly what the God they believe in, who apparently loves them more than the rest of the world who don't believe in Him, thinks about homosexuality. That kind of certainty is such a dangerous thing. I prefer the "love thy neighbour" and the dont judge everybody else approach, myself. Well, thats the kind of world I prefer to live in, anyway.

 

gotta agree w/ megsmachine here.

 

Being certain of what scripture says, ethically judging another's actions, and being certain that God loves EVERYONE are not all mutually exclusive.

 

I'm betting most everyone here has and would [somehow] judge another person on some character trait at some point in their life. i find it difficult to believe that there is even one person on earth who has NEVER judged another person. Being so certain of a non-judgmental attitude is a dangerous thing and tends to lead to a holier-than-thou complex in my observations. ;)

 

There is a definite danger in assuming who are "the people" you think believe this way, and what they are really saying. Blanket statements and all that. but I'll consider your post qualified --I'll hedge my bets that you are referring to someone who really does believe God loves THEM as an individual more than some other individual. Which isn't scriptural, but then again people have all sorts of ideas about scripture and God :)

 

But wait a sec-- you said you are "taken aback again by the people who...." --has someone in THIS thread said something about God loving them more than unbelievers?? or are you assuming that? or are you referring to statements you encountered IRL outside this thread? I'll hafta go back and re-read the thread, but I don't remember seeing anyone testifying that God loves them more than unbelievers...... I've seen quite a few admitting their own sinful state, but nothing lifting themselves on some "God's love" pedestal.

 

--------------------------------

 

eta --ok, i see it in Mom to Aly's example of her friend's dad "God doesn't love him." --obviously a guy that is a violent lunatic. gotcha. I'll just stand by the other gals that have offered the opposite side of that coin in this thread.