Most homosexuality is a choice

a reply to: AMPTAH

They turn to their holy book, and follow what it says. But, those without the benefit of such guidance, how do they determine what is right?

They must not be smart or of weak morality for them to let someone guide them.

Be glad that we are smart enough not to let that rule us. Is homosexuality a choice? No and we are smart enough not to let the Bible influence us to accept that without question.

[edit] - Even though the Bible is not against homosexuality but that's another topic.

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: AMPTAH

They turn to their holy book, and follow what it says. But, those without the benefit of such guidance, how do they determine what is right?

They must not be smart or of weak morality for them to let someone guide them.

It is interesting that you say this. I know for myself, I wasn't born knowing all things. I had to go to school. First to learn a language, so that I could think. As I began to think I realized that "Hey, I haven't created a single word that is used in this language. I'm speaking and thinking in someone else's language. They gave their language to me. Taught me their way of thinking. Where is my own thought?"

Every phrase I speak, write, think, is already out there somewhere, already thought by someone else, written down by some other person in some book or article or forum. In fact, I can't even remember where my thoughts came from anymore. I wasn't keeping track, taking notes, documenting where all my ideas came from.

What I know I have done, is "select" thoughts and ideas that seemed "good" to me. Made these ideas my own.

Invested my personal philosophy in them.

Yet, I cannot honestly tell why they seemed "good" to me. I know that when an auto manufacturer wants to sell a car to a rich dude, they photograph a scantly clad pretty girl next to the car, so that the dude will think the car is "good", and reach into his pocket and take out his wallet. It's all programming. This I can see clearly. But, I haven't been alert, and monitored all the ideas out there, to recall what positive images were being promoted when I first came across the idea, that made me subconsciously think of this or that idea as "good".

Sex is a powerful force, however, and it does have that tendency to help shape one's "selection" of ideas.

Advertisers do this all the time. So, much so, that everybody knows about this. It's no longer a secret.

So, if we're naturally tempted to make connection with thoughts and sex, how can we be sure, we're not just being manipulated by others, when we think something is good?

If we're not going to accept an overt guide, like a holy book, that clearly spells things out, to help sort out this complex world, then aren't we at risk of being subjected to all the covert influences vying for our attention, trying to lead us? If you haven't given it much thought, how on earth would you know whether you're being smart, or just proud of your own ignorance?

Anyone can claim to be smart. The word "smart" is a nice word. It's a "feel good" word. But, can you measure it?

originally posted by: AMPTAH

Not really. The Bible, for example, puts them in the same context.

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. KJV, Leviticus 18:22

Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion. KJV, Leviticus 18:23

One verse right after the other verse links homosexuality with bestiality, for example. This shows that for thousands of years society has thought of these two sexual preferences as being similar and comparable, being both deviations from the norm of heterosexual relations.

That's a self defeating argument. What Leviticus says bears no indication on what may or may not happen in the future. Leviticus also forbids you from wearing clothing with 2 different fabrics, eating shellfish and dozens of other silly things. I wouldn't consider it an authority on anything.

Assuming that equal marriage rights is going to lead to the acceptance of child / adult relationships or bestiality is the textbook definition of slippery slope. You have no idea that one will lead to the other. They are each unique issues. Maybe one day they will be brought forth and challenged, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.

Within one generation, every teenager will be experimenting with homosexual actions to see if they are straight or gay. They wouldn't know until they try, because they will be constantly seeing gay love on film and all around them.

And the slope gets even more slippery.

Saying that they wouldn't know until they try is ludicrous. Just because you would have done that, doesn't mean everybody else would. If you are not attracted to somebody, you are not attracted. It's really straight forward. So basically what we've all learned from the very first post until this moment in the thread, is that bisexuals have a choice.

a reply to: AMPTAH

I know for myself

Right exactly. You know if you are gay, straight or bisexual. Nothing influences you that way or other way.

And yes sex is a powerful force and it sells. But who and why would anyone need or want to influence anyone to be gay? People around here love to bring up the "gay agenda" but what exactly is it? Are they trying to make us gay? Why? What's the motive?

a reply to: Skyfloating

I remain skeptical of the LGBT-communities philosophy that "it's not a choice!"

It's not just the view of the LGBT community. It's also the professional position from the American Psychological Association, and other pertinent bodies, that homosexuality is little to zero choice. Which they also say towards heterosexuality.

a reply to: Skyfloating

You met two lesbians. That sound bi-sexual rather than gay.

Two.

And that somehow is your basis to claim that homosexuality is a choice? Rightio then.

a reply to: AMPTAH

Being GLBTQ+ has nothing to do with Bestiality or Pedophilia, and using the bible as a "Source" doesn't help that cause

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: AMPTAH

I know for myself

But who and why would anyone need or want to influence anyone to be gay? People around here love to bring up the "gay agenda" but what exactly is it? Are they trying to make us gay? Why? What's the motive?

Yes, there is an answer to your question. Unfortunately, it's a religious answer. For people who have no religion, the answer doesn't make any sense. In religion, there's the battle between two forces. For example, The Zoroasterian's like to call the combatants Ahura Mazda and Ahriman. That's just one example. I pick a somewhat neutral religion, just to make the point. Whatever the one creates, the other destroys. These beings influence mankind, and urge, tempt, posses minds, and cause all sorts of conflicts. They are pulling in different directions.

If one wants men and women to mate, the other wants to change that, and mate men with men and women with women instead, just to oppose the order established by the first being, and demonstrate the power of the second being. It is a war. These beings look into the mirror, and say, "Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the most powerful of them all." You know the fairy tale in a different form.

It's simply a power struggle. That's all. "I can make you do things, against your natural will." They infect all minds, to differing degree. Especially, people in positions of power.

Now in the modern times, many people reject the idea that there is anything "spiritual" going on in the world. So, they use psychology, chemistry, physics, biochemistry, genetics, etc..to explain behavior. Man attracted to man? Must be in the genes, or the chemical environment in the womb during fetal development, or psychological effect of growing up without a father, only having a mother, or being abused as a child, etc..lots and lots of alternative "rational explanations" for the variations we see. All these explanations are "made up". Then "statistical" studies are done to "prove" the points. Statistics can prove anything you want. You only have to phrase the questions right.

But, you can see the truth yourself, by following this line of thought:

A man lives 60 to 100 years. Most of the time, he is mainly concerned with finding food, shelter, providing for family, finding some entertainment, and doing whatever job brings in the cash. Some get involved in politics. But, most of the interest of a man is local in space and local in time. Most men are not concerned with what is going to happen to mankind 1000 years from now, because that's way beyond a persons lifespan. But, spiritual beings live longer than that, so their plans and actions involve making changes to guide mankind over the longer term.

The views men hold on sexuality have been gradually changing over the course of the last 1000 years. The acceptance of homosexuality today, did not happen over night. There were lots of changes within the heterosexual community that had to happen first. The list is too long to get into here, but the main point is that the developments took a long time, much longer than the lifespan of any man or woman. So, there's no contiguous group of gay men and women who just woke up and demanded their rights, in some generation. This phenomenon has been under the guidance of an intelligence that lives much longer than a human being. It has an agenda, to eliminate heterosexuals, because they are the creation of that "other intelligence". But, this isn't going to happen in our human lifetime. That's a long way down the road. According to scriptures, this whole process takes 3000 years, and we're somewhere in the middle of this process, depending on how you measure time from the start.

That this is a "power struggle" can be seen by looking at recent events. Let's take the Kim Davis situation, for example. There are other threads in this forum about this, so I'll just mention one aspect that is relevant here. No one in ATS forum posting on the Kim Davis issue, is interested in "her rights". All the gays and lesbians posting here, want her to lose her job, or be forced to act against her religion. Not a single gay or lesbian is offering the third option, to let her keep her job and her religion, and change the law so that gays and lesbians can marry without having to have the county clerk signature. They are not interested in getting married. They are in a power struggle against religion. The marriage is just being used as a tool to demolish the "religious tyrant" as they refer to her. The rights of others are not of interest to the protagonists, they want power. That's because the guiding hand is the invisible intelligence that influences their minds and provides them with the motivations necessary to carry out the long term plan.

An ordinary human, would say " let us all " have our rights. How can we accomplish this? But, that is not the game plan.
They want a specific outcome. Not willing to listen to any alternatives, like having multiple people sign marriage certificates, or even having gay employee sign the forms. No. The religious bigot must sign, or go to jail, or quit.

That's a power struggle. The only beings interested in power are the invisible powers we cannot see. As it says in the good book,

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. KJV, Ephesians 6:12

It is not a battle of ordinary men. The focus of the action demonstrates this. All these men and women are "under the influence" of spirits. And I don't mean alcohol.

originally posted by: Darth_Prime
a reply to: AMPTAH

Being GLBTQ+ has nothing to do with Bestiality or Pedophilia, and using the bible as a "Source" doesn't help that cause

GLBTO hax nothing to do with heterosexualty either. Yet, GLBTO want the same marriage. Go figure. We all see just what we want to see. But, who is right?

a reply to: Skyfloating

I`m not saying they are lying. I`m saying that there are many who are unaware of their choice in the matter.

lol! 'unaware' being the operative word..

Pray tell how being unaware of choices supports your position people have a conscious decision in the matter!?

To make a conscious decision you have to be aware of choices.

Many of your posts in this thread, including the one I quoted, seems to support something contrary to your OP. I think you need to collect your thoughts, friend.

originally posted by: AMPTAH
GLBTO hax nothing to do with heterosexualty either. Yet, GLBTO want the same marriage. Go figure. We all see just what we want to see. But, who is right?

Another futile argument. Of course it has to do with heterosexuality. It is the attraction of the sex same vs the attraction of the opposite sex. It has to do with love as well and there are tons of things that they each have in common. Comparing to pedophilia is in poor taste because it is 100% irrelevant to homosexuals having equal rights as heterosexuals. It's apples to oranges. 2 gay folks getting married does not harm anybody. A man marrying a child can destroy that child's life psychologically. They are not even remotely close. Homosexuality and heterosexuality have more in common than not. 2 consenting adults that want to get married. Love is love. A child cannot possibly understand what love is on that level and same with most animals.

And honestly, if you are against homosexuality / gay marriage because of one single verse in Leviticus taken literally, then you are a bigger hypocrite then I thought because there are dozens of verses in Leviticus that NOBODY follows anymore because they are so ridiculous and outdated. The anti gay verse is one of them. Even religious folks have NO JUSTIFICATION for the anti gay viewpoint. None at all... unless of course you follow all of the Leviticus commandments to a T. I just hope you don't get caught stoning people for adultery, selling your daughter, or eating crab.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Probably because there is no end to idiotic nonsense, and no end to those who enjoy reveling in the irrelevant.

Leviticus...

"Laying with a man..." comes in at number thirty nine. There are 38 worse things!
Eating fat is up there at number three!!!!!
Not sure if they are written in any particular order, or they are mild rantings.

Of course, number 19 is great: Eating – or touching the carcass of – flying insects with four legs, unless those legs are jointed.
So, a real easy one to avoid there. Insects tend to have more than four legs, and they tend to be jointed. You know, like INSECTS. I know this kind of science really grinds the gears of the true believer.

18 isn't much better for the pedants among us:

These are the birds you are to regard as unclean and not eat because they are unclean: the eagle,[a] the vulture, the black vulture, 14 the red kite, any kind of black kite, 15 any kind of raven, 16 the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk, 17 the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl, 18 the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey, 19 the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.
Bat's aren't birds, are they?

61, 62, 63 basically says - "No hipsters." Apparently the jury is still out on vaporizers.

70 is just bizarre: Entering a place where there’s a dead body as a priest. How do you tell?

57 is sleeping with another man's slave. Just oozes with morality, that one.

So, all you Leviticus followers (or not....because....new covenant....something...something....), stop being silly.

originally posted by: Barcs
And honestly, if you are against homosexuality / gay marriage because of one single verse in Leviticus taken literally, then you are a bigger hypocrite then I thought because there are dozens of verses in Leviticus that NOBODY follows anymore because they are so ridiculous and outdated. The anti gay verse is one of them. Even religious folks have NO JUSTIFICATION for the anti gay viewpoint. None at all... unless of course you follow all of the Leviticus commandments to a T. I just hope you don't get caught stoning people for adultery, selling your daughter, or eating crab.

No. This isn't about LEVITICUS. It is clear in one verse in Leviticus that homosexuality is not approved. But, the whole book contains lots of references to what is right and what is wrong. The book begins with Genesis, where God creates man and woman, and then declares that man shall leave his parents to cleave onto his wife, and they become one flesh. God creates a woman "EVE" to be man's companion, his "partner". God didn't create ADAM and STEVE. But, he could have done so. Why did God create a woman, instead of just creating another man for companionship? What is the whole point of these females walking around on earth? In fact, God didn't have to create sex at all. He could have just created new men whenever he wanted. Populate the whole earth with created men. And told them to be companions to each other. Seems to me, that is just as easy to do. Why the male + female plan?

Throughout the whole book, we find references to families, descendants, children of the mom and dads of the last generation, all being recorded, many genealogies. But, no gay men. And no lesbian women. Only a warning against the behavior. Since even back then, obviously, people where experimenting with their "choice". The deviant behavior was never raised to the status of a "good" thing in the bible. Every time there was gay and lesbian behavior prevalent somewhere, there was punishment to follow. The tribe of Benjamin wanted to have sex with a man, traveling through their village, and the entire tribe of Benjamin was wiped out subsequently. Sodom and Gomorrah wanted to have sex with some male angels, for the city was practicing all sorts of deviant sexuality, and God destroyed the entire city with fire, etc.. So, the message throughout the scriptures is clear, men and women have done this before, and each time it met with disapproval. Why should things be different this time around? What makes it good today? Did god change his mind?

Or, perhaps, there is no god at all. Just bigoted men, promoting an archaic view of sexuality.

But, note that the same book of Leviticus also has an anti-bestiality verse, just after the anti-gay command. So, you pick one and throw out the other. What is the rational for that?

I can give you a very good modern reason why bestiality is a good thing, and should be approved and allowed, even promoted and celebrated.

You see, some people carry sexual diseases that are transmitted to others in the same species, but not transmitted across different species. Say a woman has a venereal disease. If she has sex with a man, or a woman, she will spread that disease to the other person, causing other people to suffer. So, to be kind and understanding to other people, she should refrain from sexual relations with other people. In fact, if you knowingly have sex with another person while carrying AIDS, that is now an arrest-able offense. But, the disease doesn't affect dogs. So, if a woman decides to train her dog in the wonderful art of love making, she can continue to enjoy god's gift of sexuality, after a fashion, without putting other humans at risk. Why should we deny her the right to have sex with the animal of her choice? See? She is not hurting anyone. The animal doesn't mind. In fact, people are engaging in animal sex all over the place, some are even making "videos" of their encounters and posting them on the web. So, bestiality is a reality today. But, it's still "in the closet". No one dares to come out of the animal lover closet, and go on TV, and announce they are an animal lover, and talk about it. That's because of all the "bigots" out there that believe in the religious nonsense, that says bestiality is confusion.

But, as you can see, there is a very good logical reason why we should allow it.

The alternative, that the woman should not have any sex at all, is harsh and cruel, and unnecessary. The animals love it, just like the humans do. And if you think the animal can't "consent", think again. The dogs readily jump into the action with very little prompting, and seem to know what to do, all on their own. We all laugh at it when shown in Hollywood films, how the horny dog grabs a woman's foot and tries to make love to her foot. The dog is "compelled" the same way we humans are compelled to love it. No dog runs away from the opportunity.

So, beings consent by "moving towards" the object of their affection. It is only when they are running away, and we grab them and force them into the act, that we should really say "it is wrong."

But, nevertheless, yesterday it was fashionable to say "homosexuality" is wrong. Today, it is fashionable to say "bestiality" is wrong. Tomorrow, who can say what is wrong. None of us do anything wrong. We are all in the right. It is those other people, the bigots and the tyrants who are trying to deny us the right to do these things.

I do understand what you're saying (however, citing Adam and Eve - i.e. mud boy, and rib lady - is not going to win any argument based on reality), and these "Commandments" and "Laws" were more likely a rough guide to illiterate, and generally not very smart people living in bronze age deserts.

Many of the Levitical laws could be summarized as the following:

* Don't stick your boy parts in any of these things, and then into a lady. It will probably make your boy parts very dirty. Remember that's partially why we did away with foreskins? Never ends well.

* Don't breed with this list of family members. We've tried it before and the gene pool is a little shallow so we end up with mutants. [Some Hasidic Jews never got this one!]

* Do what the rabbis say, and all will be well. They like the power, and you get to feel morally superior.

* Here's some foods that could make you sick - especially if you don't know about basic sanitation, and proper cooking. Best leave them alone. Don't ask us how we know that Gull doesn't taste good.

* Try to be nice to each other (unless they are slaves). Don't be too much of a tool.

So, if we get past that into the 'new covenant' we get four gospels (well, two really. Plus a couple of "fantasy" versions), and a lot of flowery letter writing by the Jew, Paul. Basically, Paul attributed a lot to Jesus that the Gospel writers missed, so you have to agree there's got to be some projection. Especially given the dating.

Modern American Evangelism (the basis of all religious/political schism), then, should really be called "Paulism" - because they don't seem to follow ANY of the tenets that Jesus set out (per Christian doctrine). They seem to like Paul.

Homosexuality existed back in Bliblical times, was absolutely rife in Greece, and Rome (and Roman outposts), and many other places. It's all to do with the perception, and the social mores of the day.

The famous Jesus interaction with the centurion was about curing (from a distance) the centurion's male sex partner. Not a 'servant who he valued.' A slave that he buggered. Jesus was quite gracious, considering.

Remember that the whole bigamy thing with the Mormons came from a necessity of, "Well, there's a lot more women than there are men here. What can we do to avoid bringing in outsiders and therefore diluting our income/message?"

originally posted by: Badgered1
I do understand what you're saying (however, citing Adam and Eve - i.e. mud boy, and rib lady - is not going to win any argument based on reality), and these "Commandments" and "Laws" were more likely a rough guide to illiterate, and generally not very smart people living in bronze age deserts.

Ok. So, once we start throwing out whole sections and books from the bible, what's left? I mean, suppose we agree that Genesis was written for the illiterate, and we're smarter today. And Leviticus has all sorts of absurdities, that can't really be sorted out from each other, and so on. What do we need the bible for? Relisze that Jesus' message was even more restrictive on sex than the old testament. I mean, the old book declared "acts" as abominable, but Jesus went a lot further, and declared even "thinking" about sex was to be avoided.

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: KJV, Matthew 5:27

But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart KJV, Matthew 5:28

Gee. Jesus is even more of a tyrant. At least the old testament god allows one to look and think and fantasize. Just restrain your self when it comes to actions, and you'd be fine. But Jesus' teaching went much further,

For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. KJV, Matthew 5:20

Not only was one expected to obey the old laws, as described in the old testament, but to be a good Christian one had to do even better than those laws demanded.

The Christian view of sexuality is: abstain, abstain, abstain, and if you find that too difficult, then under the pain of suffering, go follow the old ways, get marry and have kids. The old testament is the fall back plan. If you can't make the new grade, then the old grade will do.

I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. KJV, 1 Corinthians 7:8

But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn. KJV, 1 Corinthians 7:9

So, no where in the whole book is homosexuality being promoted. The mystery then, is why do gays and lesbians want a church wedding? This old outdated book, with all its bigoted ideas, run now by a new tyrant called Jesus, who even frowns on "thinking" about sex, demanding his followers "exceed" the old rules, why on earth are the gays and lesbians looking to marry in a church?

SOURCE

What on earth is going on here?

Nobody has re-written the holy book yet. They haven't removed all these references to sexuality. So, what is the attraction to the gay and lesbian community to this bigoted religious doctrine?

a reply to: AMPTAH

Ok. So, once we start throwing out whole sections and books from the bible, what's left?

The Golden Rule.

HOW HARD is this for you to understand???

HOW is this HARD for you to understand???

WHAT do you NOT understand about it???

a reply to: AMPTAH

A bunch of men wanted to gang-rape angels disguised as men so god destroys Sodom and Gomorrah.

Ok.

Are you forgetting the part where Lot offers his daughters to be raped in their place, and that's apparently a morally permissible thing to do.

Are you forgetting that when Yahweh carpet bombed those two major cities with brimstone fireballs it would have killed many infants, toddlers, young teens, pregnant mothers...

Why would any sane person get their moral advice from a being like that??

Divine Command Theory is the belief that what is moral comes from god, and to be moral is to follow what god commands. That's the most poisonous aspect of religion in my strong opinion. It allows religious people to think something that would otherwise be viewed as a horrendous thing is a positive thing. Like blowing yourself up in order to kill people in the name of god. It also allows the religious to hate fellow humans that simply want to love each other because god allegedly doesn't approve.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

The Golden Rule.

So, let me see if I get you correctly. The persecutions that gays and lesbians are directing towards religious folks today, are payback for the persecutions homosexuals experienced over the centuries from the religious community. Do onto them as they did onto you. Is that a fair assessment?

a reply to: AMPTAH

The persecutions that gays and lesbians are directing towards religious folks today, are payback for the persecutions homosexuals experienced over the centuries from the religious community.

What persecutions?

And how the hell did you see that persecutions are acceptable in the Golden Rule?