Is homosexuality a sin?

I got this in an email forward, I wanted to get some feedback on what some of our board members thought about it. Peronally, I believe that homosexuality is a sin.


Homosexuality is NOT a sin. All scripture passages
aside, when it's all said and
done, sin is something you CHOOSE to do. I know of
no one, myself included, who chose
to be homosexual. I know of no one who chose to be
Bi-Sexual, or Lesbian or straight, for
that matter. It is what we are, and a part of who we
are.
It's not surprising that the Church would condemn homosexuality,
since, as a whole the church has a history of condemning sexuality in
and of itself. For example, The Church
says that it's a sin to have sex before marriage.
That's not biblical. Some churches say
you can't kiss passionately, or masturbate. That's
also not biblical. Some churches say
that you can't live with someone of the opposite
gender before you marry them. This
too isn't biblical.
The Church's condemnation of homosexuality is only
one link in a line of
condemnations regarding sexuality that the church
has taught as "truth". The real truth
of the matter is that it's a sin to teach that
you're sexuality is evil or sinful. It's a sin to
teach
that one sexuality is right and that any other kind
of sexuality is wrong. It's a sin for the
church or anyone else, for that matter, to shame you
because you desire sex, or
because you find it pleasurable. God created sex,
God designed your sexuality.
When someone, even a priest, a minister or a pastor,
condemns you for your sexuality,
they're automatically condemning God, because God
created your sexuality.
What about scripture ? Doesn't scripture agree with
church doctrine ?
Absolutely not ! Scripture has been pulled out of
context to make it appear to agree
with church doctrine. For example, the religious
right loves to quote Leviticus 18:22
"...You shall not lie with a male as with a woman.
It is an abomination. .."
First of all, when you present scripture to anyone,
you present more than just
one sentence. When you read the bible, you read the
whole paragraph, or the
whole chapter, if need be, to find out what's going
on and who's being spoken to.
For example, if we look at the same passage of
scripture, and start reading it at
the beginning, it says "The Lord spoke to Moses
saying " Speak to the children of
Israel, and say to them: I am the Lord your God.
According to the doings in
the land of Egypt, where you dwelt, you shall not
do; and according to the
doings in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing
you, you shall not do; nor
shall you walk in their ordinances. You shall
observe My judgments and keep
my ordinances to walk in them: I am the Lord your
God. You shall therefore keep
my statues and my judgments, which if a man does, he
shall live by them: I
am the Lord. ..." Following this, he gives the
Israelites the sexual code where
Leviticus 18:22 comes from. This puts a whole
different spin on Leviticus 18:22.

Egypt was a pagan culture, as was Canaan. God was
telling the Israelites,
"People, you left a pagan culture and you're going
to go to a pagan culture, but you
are NOT to act like a pagan culture. You are not to
copy their religious practices,
nor are you to follow their laws. Do as I tell you ,
and you will survive."
Leviticus 18:22 is talking about a pagan religious
rite. In fact, notice that
in that particular passage, God calls this practice
"an abomination". In Hebrew that word
is "towebah" (Tow-ay-bah) it means "idolatry" This "homosexuality" was
in fact a religious rite. This had nothing to do with
affection, or love. This was about
religious obligation, "duty to the GODS", that kind
of thing.
More importantly, if Leviticus is so important a
book to them, why don't
they follow the rest of the commands given there.
For example, in Leviticus 19:19 it
says that you shall not let you livestock breed with
another kind, or that you shall not
sow your field with mixed seed, or that you shall
not wear a garment of mixed linen and
wool. Leviticus 19:27 says that you shall not shave
around the sides of your beard
nor shall you disfigure the edges of your beard. How
about the laws concerning
clean and unclean animals ? (Leviticus 11:24-47) How
about the forbidden foods
in Leviticus 11:1-23). These are thing that "the
religious right" never mentions,
and yet, they're part of our daily lives. For
example, just about everyone wears
clothes that are poly-cotton blend. Most people who
have beards, shave them a bit so
they look neat and presentable. Both in direct
violation of Leviticus. Also, how many
of them do you suppose like football? That too, is
in violation of scripture. The ball
is pigskin, which according to Leviticus, is unclean
to eat or to touch . My point here is
that you can't just piecemeal scripture that way.
You can't just obey one
part here and one part there and cut out the parts
you don't like. That doesn't work , but yet,
that's just they attempt to do when they pull
passages out of the Old Testament like that.
Another one they love to quote is 1 Corinthians 6:9,
which in some translations
of the bible actually uses the word "homosexuals".
That word in Greek, it turns out, is
"arsenokoites" which means, literally, "man-bed",
"man-couch", "man - chambering"
NOT "homosexual". Paul's history was that he was
very direct in what he said,
he didn't mince words. He was also a very
intelligent man, he spoke Aramaic and
Greek, he was able to write Greek as well. So with
that in mind, if he wanted to
write "homosexual" why wouldn't he have used the
word "homophilia" which means
homosexual ?
Bear in mind, also, that Corinth wasn't exactly a
"squeaky clean " town either.
Corinth had a reputation for being a town of drunks,
hookers (only, they called them
"Courtesans") and basically, corrupt people. Their
type of worship before Christ
was introduced to them was the worship of Aphrodite.
(believe me, they got pretty
lewd in their "worship practices of her") . It kind
of makes you think, that when Paul
was referring to "man-beds" he may have been
referring to the "courtesans"
(they had both male and female at that time).
Finally, if homosexuality really was a sin, it would
bear the fruits of sin. Jesus
tells us in Matthew 7:17-19 that a good tree bears
good fruit and a bad tree bears
bad fruit. In that case, what are the fruits of
homosexuality ? There really aren't, are there?
You can't say that A.I.D.S / H.I.V is a fruit of
homosexuality , because if it were, then
straight people wouldn't get it, neither would
children be born with it or die of it.

So, when people tell you that homosexuality is a
sin, don't believe it !

Respectfully.....this has been done to death....You can find a lot on this subject if you do a search...

Genesis 19
5 They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."
6 Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him 7 and said, "No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing. 8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof."

Leviticus 18
22 " 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.

Leviticus 20
13 " 'If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

Judges 19
22 While they were enjoying themselves, some of the wicked men of the city surrounded the house. Pounding on the door, they shouted to the old man who owned the house, "Bring out the man who came to your house so we can have sex with him."

1 Kings 14
24 There were even male shrine prostitutes in the land; the people engaged in all the detestable practices of the nations the LORD had driven out before the Israelites.

Romans 1

24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.

1 Corinthians 6

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders

This is but a few. However, is it really a sin? I am a Nor Cal Republican so Im more moderate on issues, but IMHO it is not a sin, but Im an athiest, so does it really matter what my opinion is?

Originally posted by FredT
Leviticus 18
22 " 'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.

The bible also mentions some other stuff, here is something someone posted to another group that was relevant:

* When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it
creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Leviticus 1:9). The problem is
my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I
smite them?
* I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair
price for her?
* I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in
her period of menstrual uncleanness (Leviticus 15:19-24). The problem
is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
* Leviticus 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both
male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations.
A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not
Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
* I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus
35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated
to kill him myself?
* A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination (Leviticus 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?
* Leviticus 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God
if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading
glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room
here?
* Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the
hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by
Leviticus 19:27. How should they die?
* I know from Leviticus 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead
pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
* My friend practices the Wiccan religion. Since Exodus 22:18
states that he must be put to death, am I morally obligated to kill
him as well?
* My uncle has a farm. He violates Leviticus 19:19 by planting two
different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing
garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester
blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really
necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town
together to stone them (Leviticus 24:10-16)? Couldn't we just burn
them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who
sleep with their in-laws (Leviticus 20:14)?
* I read that Amnesty International is in Thailand protesting the
selling of underaged girls into slavery and prostitution. Should I
write my congressmen and request that we encourage these young girls
to obey their masters as it states in Ephesians 6:5?
* I need to do some business on the island of Crete soon but Titus
1:12 states that people from the island of Crete are liars and lazy.
Should I be careful when doing business there?
* At the church I attend, some women lead a Bible study. What is
the best way to tell them to shut up? We must not have women speaking
in church when 1 Timothy 2:12 forbids them to.
* Many of the women in our church wear jewelry. Since women are
forbidden to wear jewelry (1 Peter 3:3) what is the best way to tell
them they are going to hell?
* I want to obey 2 Thessalonians 1:26 and greet all the women at
our church with a kiss. Why do I get strange looks from them when I do
- especially from their husbands? What about French kissing?
* Recently, I have asked several women in my church to marry me
since it is permissible for a man to have many wives (1 Kings 11:3).
Why do I continually get rejected? People at church are beginning to
talk.
* I suppose I will not get married since the Bible states that men
ought not marry (1 Corinthians 7:1). What do you suggest?
* There are many unbelievers where I work and because we are
forbidden to associate with them (1 Corinthians 4:11), I am wondering
how best to tell them to keep away from me.
* Should I have the foreskin of my penis cut off? Exodus 12:48
commands that all men must do this. I would have my doctor do it but I
think I can save some money by doing it myself. Any ideas on how best
to do it?
* In the case of a circumcised baby who has lost his entire penis
due to a botched circumcision, who has ended up having transgender
sexual surgery performed upon him, who has subsequently been given
female hormones and raised as a girl, who has no idea what has
happened to him and who grows up with an innate confusion about his
true identity, who is never told about what originally happened to
him, who is most often quite odd-looking in appearance (essentially
like the character "Pat" played by Julia Sweeney of Saturday Night
Live television fame; what is described as a "butch" female by some
people), who is often ostracized and continually insulted and taunted
by society for his appearance; such a person, when he participates in
what appears to be heterosexual sex, that must mean that he is really
participating in homosexual sex instead, and thus, should he be
treated as a homosexual and condemned to hell also, or should we give
him just a little leverage in the matter, since, after all, his
parents were really trying to live by God's law?
* I know that Jesus' main teaching is that we should love our
neighbor as we love God. However, if I have homosexual neighbors, does
this mean that I should not love them like Jesus said I should, and
that I should condemn them to eternal hell, instead of allowing Jesus
to do that when they die, if Jesus really wants to do that?

source

Fred:

People who call themselves "Christians" have a very curious habit of picking and choosing what they like from Jewish Scriptures--- thinking it to be the word of YHWH the "god" they believe in (kind of-sort of) and thus should be obeyed--on the one hand---yet on the other hand---and in another breath----declare that they are somehow freed of the ritual constraints of the Jewish Old Testament "Mosaic" Torah by the BLATANTLY PAGAN RITUAL of "drinking the blood of Iesous" and "by eating of his flesh" and other such cannabilistic claptrap (like the Mithraic Eucharist) they don't really understand.

What they don't understand about the Toqebah Laws in the book of Leveticus is that the laws ORIGINALLY ONLY APPLIED TO THE LEVETICAL PRIESTS (probably the cult of YHWH at Shiloh) and ONLY AFTER THE BABYLONIAN EXILE did the priests reform the government on Yahwistic Models (Hear O Israel YAHWEH is our clan god, YAHWEH ALONE!) and "YE SHALL BE UNTO ME A KINGDOM OF PRIESTS, YEA A HOLY NATION!" so that the priestly "FORBIDDEN ACTS" of RITUAL DEFILEMENT also was later extended FROM THE PRIESTS to the whole GENERAL POPULATION of ISRAELITES----ostensbly this was a ruse to keep the nation "holy" and therefore free from being invaded again by the Goyim...

Didn't work though. The Persians quickly occupied their country and killed their Daviddic King Zerbabbel who launched a counter revolution around 430 BC, and then came the Greeks, and then came the Romans, and, well...we all know what the Romans did to the Jews.

BUT THE IDEA OF TOQEBAH AS APPLYING TO ALL THE PEOPLE WAS A LATE IDEA: EVEN MOSES OWN FATHER COMMITTED TOQEBOT:

For the Torah SPECIFICALLY states it is TOQEBAH (an Abomination) for a man to screw his Aunt or his Mother or his Grandmother (these are all TOQEBAH) but when one considers that MOSES own FATHER AMRAM MARRIED HIS OWN AUNT YOSHABED...well....!

So much for these TOQEBOTH (list of Abominations) being in the orignal TORAH OF MOSES !!!!!

The English word your paltry translation of the Hebrew texts has for whatever reason chosen to translate as "DETESTIBLE" in Hebrew is the priestly term [ "Toq'ebah"] ---WHICH IS A TECHNICAL RITUAL TERM SPECIFICLALLY MEANING "ABOMINABLE" TO THE CULT OF THE GOD, i.e. something the Priests that compiled all the cult laws for the TEMPLE CULT of YHWH AFTER THE EXILE came up with i.e. after 531 BC in order to "ritually separate" its own cult of YHWH from all the other cults being practiced in Palestine (especially the ritual practices of the invaders such as the Babylonians and Persians).

THE LISTS OF "ABOMINATIONS" (TOQEBOTH) IN THE OLD TESTAMENT IS RITUAL REACTIONISM IN THE EXTREME........

If the writer(s) of Leviticus wished to refer to a preuly "moral" violation, i.e. a moral sin, these post Exilic re-organisers would have used the Hebrew term "ZIMAH" and NOT the RiTUAL TERM "TOQEBAH."...

The word "Abomination" that we see in English translations of the Bible could better be translated "foreign religious cult Practice or Object which the clan god detests."

The Greek Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (circa 3rd century BCE) translated toQebah into Greek as BDELUGMA which meant "a certain ritual impurity which the clan-god "hates"

NOTICE HOW ToQEBAH is USED IN THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES:

IT IS CLOSELY LINKED IN ALMOST EVERY CASE WITH IDOLATRY (PAGAN IDOL WORSHIP)

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MORALITY BUT EVERYTHING TO DO WITH RITUAL INFLUENCE FROM PAGAN GOYIM

(the one or two exceptions to that rule are found in some Poetical sections of the Psalms and in the poetical usage of the term in the Book of Proverbs but in these few cases the term is clearly poetical):

In 98% of the other cases of TOQEBAH in the OT, the WORD IS USED ONLY IN RELATION TO THE TEMPLE PRIESTLY CULT OF YHWH IN TERMS OF IT REACTION THE "UNCLEAN RITUAL PRACTICES, DRESS, BODILLY ADORNMENT, and DIETARY HABITS OF THE GOYIM who lived dangerously close to the returnees from Babylon aftetr 531 BC.

READ ABOUT ALL THE MALE TO MALE SEX PRACTICED BY THE PAGAN PRIESTLY SODOMITES IN Deut. 23:17; 1 Kin. 14:24; 15:12; 22:46; 2 Kin. 23:7;

The word QADESH in the Hebrew text was mistranslated as "sodomite". Qadesh literally means "holy one" and is here used to refer to a man who engages in ritual prostitution in a Pagan temple.

The entire verse seems to condemn temple, ritual, prostitution, whether heterosexual or homosexual.

It has nothing to say about same sex in a MORAL setting, only a TEMPLE SETTING. SAME SEX MALE TO MALE PROSTITUTION IN THE OLD TESTAMENT WAS SPOKEN AGAINST IN A RITUAL CONNOTATION (sometimes they were called "DOGS" but clearly referred to something practiced widely by rival priesthoods of other gods than YHWH, same-sex acts which were Ritually Performed on non -Yahwistic Altars, such as the ones that SOLOMON BUILT FOR HIS WIVES IN II KINGS (chapter 11 to 20) as fertility rites) AND NOT A MORAL CONDEMnATION ---such as those people who today style themseles as "Christians" habitually misuse the term---which they do not understand.

It seems strange that moden day "Christians" no longer even try to obey any of the Old Testament Torah Laws that they so freely quote from when pointing out "male to male sex" yet they themselves are free to commit every type of ABOMINATION in the SIGHT OF YHWH,

e.g. they freely wear tattoos on their arms, they even eat Lobster and shrimp IN PUBLIC, and chomp down on pork or rare meat, wear polyester-cotton blends, seed their lawns with a grass mixture, and get their hair cut, even the Corners of their templesl,all of which is ABOMINATION (ritual Toqebah) to YHWH the clan god of Israel.

But for some reason, the Man with Man Sex, i.e. the lying together thing gets caught in their throat: Homosexuality for them is somehow taboo (yet they read about THE DISCIPLE WHOM IESOUS "LOVED" LEANING ON HIS BREAST AT THE LAST SUPPER AND DON'T BLINK AN EYELASH !!!!)

Maybe the REAL reason for this apparent aversion to male to male sexual expression is simply because male to male sex doesn't produce more Bible believing Christian bodies to pu their tax free donation into the coffer every week. It has no practical value in perpetuating the Church member numbers.

HERE ARE SOME USAGES OF TOQEBAH IN THE OLD TESTAMENT WHICH SHOW THAT THE TERM IS IN FACT A RITUAL TERM AND NOT AN EVERYDAY MORAL ONE TO BE APPLIED BY WESTERN CULTURES WHO PROMOTE THINGS LIKE...well, DEMOCRACY.

It is RITUALLY "TOQEBAH for an EGYPTIAN TO BREAK BREAD WITH HAPIRU" as it says in Genesis Chapter 43:32.

or see Genesis 46:34

FOR NOMADS ARE (ritually) TOQEBAH TO THE EGYPTIANS

Notice how the word is used IN A PURELY RITUAL (not moral) SENSE

EXODUS 8:26 FOR THE ISRAELITES WOULD HAVE TO THERFORE SACRIFICE THE RITUAL ABOMINATION (ToQEBAH) OF THE EGYPTIANS (The Sacred OX or Hathor the Sacred Cow): l

QUOTE: BEHOLD, shall we sacrifice the RITUAL TOQEBAH of the Egyptians before their very eyes, and will they not RITUALLY stone us to death?" (Exodus 8:25-26, KJV)


IT IS TOQEBAH FOR A MAN TO SOW TWO DIVERSE SEEDS IN THE SAME FIELD

IT IS TOQEBAH FOR A MAN TO WEAR COTTON AND LINEN IN THE SAME GARMENT

You shall not lie down with a male as with a woman; it is TOQEBAH (Leviticus 18:22) (but that little law didn't stop David from sleeping with boytoy Jonathan, male-to-male, I Samuel 20:30 !!)

"The images of their gods you shall burn with fire. Do not covet the silver or the gold that is on them and take it for yourself, because you could be ensnared by it; for THIS IS RITUAL TOQEBAH to your clan god YHWH." (Deuteronomy 7:25)

"You shall not eat any THING OF RITUAL TOQEBAH. . . Yet of those that chew the cud or have the hoof cleft you shall not eat these: the camel, the hare, and the rock badger, because they chew the cud but do not divide the hoof; they are unclean for you. (Deuteronomy 14:3, 7-8)

READ THE BOOK OF THE PROPHET HEZEKIEL: "HAVE YOU SEEN O SON OF MAN THESE RITUAL ABOMINATIONS [TOQEBOTH] IN THE TEMPLE: YE SHALL SEE MORE THAN THESE YET..."

Read Deuteronomy 18:9 for another LIST OF TOQEBOTH (Ritual Abominations)

When you come to the land which YHWH your clan god gives to you, you will not learn to do according to the TOQEBOTH of those goyim Gentiles (pagans = non Jews): For there will not found among you one who:

Passes his son and his daughter through the fire to the god Moloch
Nor a User of Divinations,
Nor an Observer of Clouds
Nor an Enchanter,
Nor a Sorcerer,
Nor a Snake Charmer
Nor a Consultor of Departed Spirits,
Nor a Magician,
Nor of One who Seeks the Dead for Oracles

YHWH holds every one of these things IN RITUAL TOQEBAH and every person doing these, and because of these RITUAL TOQEBOT shall YHWH, your clan god dispossess them from before your faces... "

Yet "Christians" (whatever that means) QUICKLY IGNORE all the Old Testament Hebew and Ritual Connotation of the tern TOQEBAH and go straight for the gay stuff, claiming things like:

See, We told you....God doesn't like that..!! Yeah, well, he doesn't like women wearing pants either, that's also TOQEBOTH and can get you stoned to death !!

The way these fanatics eyes pop out when they address this subject, one might think some of these Jerry-Fallwell-Oral Roberts-John Ashcroft-Lookalike Finger Pointers that somehow know exactly how to home in on that very section in Leveticus might be suffering from shall we say.....some very seriously rooted homo-sexual inhibitions??!!

Amadeus,

You may have missed the bottom part of my post. I was just answering in the "religious" orientation of the post. If you look at the bottm, I am an athiest, so to me the bible is just a large book that belongs in the fiction section.

umm, to answer the question:
No.

Actually, yes, yes it is a sin, because if the bible says it's a sin then its a sin. Frankly, that dont mean jack. A lot of things say a lot of different things, jsut cuz an old book says its terrible and morally reprehensible doesnt mean it is. (IMO) Sin is nothing. God is nothing, religion is nothing. Falsehoods, take no heed of them(/IMO)

as random email chain mail starter said, its not a choice.

Would it be a sin if had sex with my male dog K9.

The reality is homosexuality is embraced but beastiality is suppressed. But the reason why homosexuality is embraced is because people have been contiditioned to accpect it.

Then you look into homosexuality it doesn't follow natural laws, it's more of cancer type action with no logical sense.

One with studies in morals doesn't need to look in a bible to find out that homosexuality is wrong.

.
Sin is an emotional brain state.

For some people a LOT of things are a sin.

For many others those things are NOT a sin.

Sin is in your head. If you don't like it get rid of it.
.

Originally posted by Thinker
Then you look into homosexuality it doesn't follow natural laws, it's more of cancer type action with no logical sense.

Some suggests otherwise... It happens all across nature, isnt that as natural as it gets? I would consider the strive for pleasure without reproduction a pretty natural thing. The means of achieving it isnt all that important.

Hey Non-Thinker:

Actually, the scientific evidence proves that Nature (i.e. on earth) does not care about labels: e.g. heterosexuality, bi-sexuality or homosexuality.

Nature does not know (nor does it care to know) of any distinction in sexual practice (of course you'd have to study animal behaviour in detail to know this): in other words, all Nature knows is: SEXUALITY.

You'd have to study the curious homosexual activity of say, the Bonobo for example...

Here's a recent Article for you to digest if you can---which suggests that many until recently have deliberately suppressed this very unsettling new information for many people who have been conditioned to think "homosexual lifestyles" are "sinful" because "the Bible says so..." but people who say this cannot read Paleo Hebrew or even Greek, and do not know anything about post Exilic Yahwistic Ritual Toqeboth (read my comments above please...) which was RITUAL SACRIFICIAL BEHAVIOURAL TABOOS (i.e. on the altar):

Otherwise, how could you explain the homosexual relationship between David and Jonathan, who were clearly doing more than just "holding hands and exchanging underwear and Armour" (I Samuel 20:30, and II Sam 1:35 ff) ---see if you can get someone to translate all those technical paleo-Hebrew terms for you, they're even jucier in the unpointed Paleo Hebrew !)...

TIME FOR YOU TO READ AND LEARN (for a change)

ARTICLE:

Homosexuality in the Animal Kingdom: What the CHURCH & THE US PRESS WON�T TELL YOU Associated Press 08-03-2004

"Some same-sex birds like doves do it. So do beetles, sheep, fruit bats, dolphins, gorillas and orangutans.

Zoologists are now openly discovering that "homosexual and bi-sexual" activity is actually fairly common within the Animal Kingdom, especially among higher primates, including homo sapiens sapiens.

Roy and Silo, two male chinstrap penguins at New York's Central Park Zoo have been inseparable for six years now.

They display classic pair-bonding behavior�entwining of necks, mutual preening, flipper flapping, and the rest.

They also have anal sex, while ignoring and even shunning potential female mates.

Wild birds exhibit similar behavior. There are male ostriches that only court their own gender, and pairs of male flamingos that mate, build nests, and even raise foster chicks.

On the other hand, they could just be amusing themselves, suggests Paul Vasey, animal behavior professor at the University of Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada.

"They're engaging in the behavior because it's gratifying sexually or it's just plain sexually pleasurable," he says.

"It is clear, that they just like doing it for fun. But it doesn't have any sort of adaptive (evolutionary) payoff."

Matthew Grober, biology professor at Georgia State University, agrees, saying, "If [sex] wasn't fun, we wouldn't have any kids around.

So I think that maybe Japanese Macaques have taken the fun aspect of sex and really run with it."

The Bonobo, an African ape very closely related to humans, has an even bigger sexual appetite. Studies suggest 75 percent of bonobo sex is nonreproductive and that nearly all bonobos are bisexual.

Frans de Waal, author of Bonobo: The Forgotten Ape, calls the species a "make love, not war" primate.

He believes Bonobos often use sex to resolve conflicts between individuals within their own species.

Other animals appear to go through a "homosexual adolescent phase" before they become fully mature.

For instance, male dolphin calves often form temporary male to male sexual partnerships, which scientists believe help to establish lifelong "social" bonds.

Such sexual behavior has been documented only relatively recently.

Zoologists have been accused of skirting round the subject for fear of stepping into a political minefield.

"There was a lot of hiding of what was going on, I think, because people were maybe afraid that they would get into trouble by talking about it," notes de Waal.

Whether it's a good idea or not, it's hard not make comparisons between humans and other animals, especially primates.

The fact that homosexuality does, after all, exist in the natural world is bound to be used against people who insist such behavior is unnatural.

So how far can we go in using animals to help us understand human homosexuality?

Robin Dunbar is Regens Professor of Evolutionary Psychology at the University of Liverpool in England.

"The bottom line is that anything that happens in other primates, and particularly other apes, is likely to have strong evolutionary continuity with what happens in humans," he said.

Dunbar says the Bonobo's use of Homosexual Activity for "social bonding" is a possible example, adding,

"One of the main arguments for human homosexual behavior is that it helps bond male groups together, particularly where a group of individuals are dependent on each other, as they might be in hunting or warfare."

--END OF ARTICLE...

Maybe you should read some of the Greek classics (do you know who Plato is?) or learn a little bit about the people who shaped world history: people like you (who have limited education on these matters) make those towering geniuses like Michelangelo Buonarroti and Leonardo da Vinci "very inconvenient...." for your rather narrow and outdated weltanschauung.....

HEY~!
The church banned and hanged many people whom it thought as homosexuals and those it accused of sodomy, who is going to rationalize with the church on what is and isn't wrong?
The church belives in its faith and if you belive in it than you must also have FAITH in its morals.
BTW : Do you know that psychologists still think that homosexuality is some sort of mental conditon

I understand and to some extant give some credence to the idea that neither homosexuality or heterosexuality are choices. I am attracted to women and quite frankly have no choice in the matter so I can see how it may be the same for homosexuals. However I can not see the same being said for bisexuals. As far as I am concerned they are simply equal opportunity sluts.

Originally posted by mwm1331
I understand and to some extant give some credence to the idea that neither homosexuality or heterosexuality are choices. I am attracted to women.......

...However I can not see the same being said for bisexuals. As far as I am concerned they are simply equal opportunity sluts.

SEX,SEX ,SEX people can't get enough of it !!!
I like bisexuals (only women i mean) , but the fact is people don't care.
Hey, would you complain if you were witness to a lesbian fantasy and they asked you to join????

Originally posted by LadyV
Respectfully.....this has been done to death....You can find a lot on this subject if you do a search...

Amen to that! The thing that gets me is that most who assume to 'know' about homsexuality and related issues don't actually know any gay, lesbians or bi-sexuals (as per their own admission).

Originally posted by deeprivergal
I got this in an email forward, I wanted to get some feedback on what some of our board members thought about it. Peronally, I believe that homosexuality is a sin.

 

Homosexuality is a sin because:
1) God created man and woman as beings of opposite sex to live with each other and maintain the kind
2) Pope JP II says homosexuality is a sin and he knows what he's talking about

Originally posted by AtheiX
Homosexuality is a sin because:
1) God (Personal Assumption) created (Personal Assumption) man and woman as beings of opposite sex to live with each other and maintain the kind
2) Pope JP II says homosexuality is a sin and he knows (Personal Assumption) what he's talking about

Where's the beef (proof)? That, by the way, is rhetorical question as I know you don't have any.

It must be nice to have your hate justified by a surpreme being.

Homosexuality is a sin because:
1) God created man and woman as beings of opposite sex to live with each other and maintain the kind
2) Pope JP II says homosexuality is a sin and he knows what he's talking about

Umm Ok. You really need to Deny Ignorance. Just becouse someone knows what they are talking about, doesn't always make them right.


[edit on 28-9-2004 by jmilici]

Hello there, IAF101:

The UN and other world agencies removed "human adult homosexuality" from its list of "mental illnesses" in 1974.

The UN also removed the next one on their list "of mental illnesses" while they were at it: "Working Women", which was also considered a mental illness (the former idea being that women who work outside the home and family (where they presumably belong) are some how mentally ill in need of treatement.

I think we've come a long way since Freud's Theory of BISEXUALITY in HUMANS....but sometimes I think not far enough !!

You'll be pleased to know that there are 11% of the general population who considers themselves HOMOSEXUAL (most of these are married with children in the world, due to "societal pressure").

Curiously, this 11% figure is almost exactly the SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THE WORLD (percentage-wise) THAT CONSIDER THEMSELVES LEFT HANDED...

And the "Christian Church" used to burn LEFT HANDED PERSONS at the stake as heretics througout the middle ages ("sinister" is the Latin word for Left-Handed, alligned with the Devil, of course to Christians) RIGHT ALONG SIDE HOMOSEXUALS.

Or as Dr Laura Schlessinger thinks: My Rabbi said, YOU'RE DIFFERENT, AND THAT'S BAD!!

Seems you have a LONG way to go in the spiritual evolutionary dept., but I never give up hope on anyone, no matter how undeveloped they seem on these threads ...!

I'm far too busy being a cancer/blight/stain/creeping disease/abomination on the face of the earth to take part in this debate right now.