Sorry extreme liberals, but homosexuality IS a choice

I am a liberal who after much thought on the issue does support the legality of gay marriage, but one thing I can't stand from ultra-PC liberals is when they disagree with conservatives' contention that homosexuality is a choice.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not one of those Mr. Bachmann-types who thinks you can brainwash the "gay" out of people. I don't think that homosexual attraction is a choice. I firmly believe that who you are attracted to is a natural phenomenon, and there's nothing you can do about that. But conservatives are absolutely right...homosexuality IS a choice, just as heterosexuality is a choice. And what is that choice? Simple...having sex with the people you're attracted to (assuming, by the way, that it's consensual). There are other options: celibacy, of course, or a denial of your true attractions and conforming to heterosexuality (something that was more rampant pre-1970s, leading to many "closeted" people having unfulfilled lives and sometimes resorting to suicide). These aren't particularly attractive options, and I wouldn't wish them upon people, but they are still CHOICES. What the PC-liberal crowd fails to acknowledge is that while you can't control who you are attracted to, you sure as HELL can control who you have sex with (or so I keep telling myself...the key to that is being SOBER!)

To frame it differently, let's say there's a 40 year-old man who is attracted to 8 year-old girls. He can't control his attraction, it eats at his soul, but it won't go away. This man would have my sympathy. But the moment he CHOSE to act on that attraction is the moment he would not only lose my sympathy but become indefensible. I believe this because I have the (fairly non-controversial) opinion that pedophilia is a ghastly sin. But many conservatives have the viewpoint that homosexuality is a sin, and so thus when a person engages in homosexual behavior are committing a sin. I may not agree with this viewpoint, but I still can acknowledge that conservatives are correct when they say that homosexuality is a choice.

 

Right.

Homosexual or heterosexual ACTIONS can be controlled; attractions cannot. But that distinction must be made in order for most people to understand the reality of things.

 

I am sorry but I must differ with you here. Homosexuality is a disorder of the mind. Now, there may be a few folks who do choose to experiment with it, but real homosexuals suffer from a disorder.

Same sex attaraction is a disorder according to the American Psychological Association (APA) for most of its history, until recently.

For some folks though, this disorder is now the "non-disorder formerly known as disorder." It was a disorder in the DSM I and II published by the APA. But in the last publication, DSM IV, it was removed as a disorder. Why?

Protests by gay rights activists against the APA began in 1970 when the organization held its convention in San Francisco. The activists disrupted the conference by interrupting speakers and shouting down and ridiculing psychiatrists who viewed homosexuality as a mental disorder. In 1971, gay rights activist Frank Kameny worked with the Gay Liberation Front collective to demonstrate against the APA's convention. At the 1971 conference, Kameny grabbed the microphone and yelled, "Psychiatry is the enemy incarnate. Psychiatry has waged a relentless war of extermination against us. You may take this as a declaration of war against you." To put is bluntly, the American Psychological Association buckled and caved to protestors, and therefore have no legitimacy now.

So the APA can be, and is, wrong. The current APA thinks that they were "wrong back then," and "right now." But certainly, the opposite can be true, that is was right back then and wrong now. I think that they were right before and wrong now because they now fear liberal retaliation and politcial correctness that did not exist before.

 

No homosexuality is NOT a choice. Of course all our actions are a choice but more and more research is showing that whether or not we are homosexual or heterosexual is biological. People of either sexual orientation can CHOOSE to be abstinent by why should they? As long as what they are doing is with other consenting adults it is really not anyone else's business. Sex has been proven to be a vital part of the human relationship. Why should people deny who they are at their core just because others out there want to judge them? Your analogy of using a pedophile is really not valid as a pedophile will violate the rights of his/her victim and someone who is homosexual and in a consenting relationship with another adult is not violating the rights of anyone.

As for homosexuality once being a "disorder" classified by the APA, like I said, research is showing that it is very simply biology. It was removed. It is called progress. We once considered people of color inferior in every way and that has proven to be false as well. The only ones who continue to consider this a "disorder" and a "sin" are those that subscribe to a book that was written 2000 years ago- by man.

Here is a link of the latest research that shows that the brains of homosexuals is actually structured like that of the opposite sex.

http://www.newscientist.com/article...tructured-like-those-of-the-opposite-sex.html

 

Heterosexuality is a choice? Tell us, assuming you're not gay, when you made the decision to be either gay or heterosexual. This should be interesting...

 

Orientation isn't a choice, acting on it (or not) is. That is quite obvious (I thought!). The question is what is your conclusion from that fact.

For a start, much of the discrimination against homosexuals is against the orientation (or suspicion of it). Celibate homosexuals are condemned, restricted or attacked too. Most of the time we have no idea whether anyone is sexually active or not.

Secondly, if the implication is that homosexuals can or should be punished for their choices in sexual partners, shouldn't the same principal extend equally to heterosexuals? I hear a lot more condemnation of being gay (regardless of activity) than I do of having multiple partners yet both are traditionally considered equal sins and from a rational point of view, a long term monogamous homosexual relationship is better than a heterosexual sleeping around with multiple strangers.

Individuals are free to consider any activity they want as wrong or sinful. There is a much more significant question of whether the law of the land should be changed to enforce those opinions on everyone else.

 

See, this is how science works; through study and prorgess (that scary word). I'm glad you acknowledge that psychiatry got it wrong, corrected its mistakes, and no longer contends that homosexuality is a 'disorder', as you'd like to pretend it is.
Go on, quote us some bible 'facts' to support your argument.

 

Why do you throw the Bible into it? I didn't. I am talking straight psychology.

Are you denying that many doctors and scientists are motivated by politics and not by facts? If you are then you're a dunce.

 

Any medic with a shred of credibility is motivated by the Hippocratic oath he or she took. They're the ones I listen to and respect.

 

"disorder" is an interesting word to use. The oxford dictionary says a 'disorder' is "an illness that disrupts normal physical or mental functions". Obviously you view homosexuality as both an abnormal mental function, and a disease. As they say, though, opinions are like (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s, and mine is that homosexuality is uncommon but not abnormal, and that since homosexuals are often happy and healthy then I can't really say it's a disease either.

As to the OP, I see the point you're making but I think it's really only a distraction. Yes, it's true that if you abstain then you're technically asexual rather than homosexual. But many, perhaps most, of the issues are not really to do with the act of sex but with the orientation of the person. Gay marriage? You don't NEED to have sex to want that. Gay bashers? Those people don't CARE if you're practicing or not. Gay clerics? I'd be surprised if they let people say "I'm gay but dont have sex" and still continue to say mass or whatever.

So yes, technically true, but largely irrelevant.

 

You didn't even read the post, did you?

 

Not being attracted to a post-pubescent member of the opposite sex certainly has to be a disorder of some kind...perhaps not a psychological disorder, but a biological disorder. If everybody were like that, the human race would go extinct.

 

Explain to me what I misunderstood about 'homosexuality is a choice'?

 

it may well be argued that religious belief is a disorder of the mind.

and based on historical evidence, an extremely dangerous disorder of the mind.

 

Q.F.T.

Same sex attaraction is a disorder according to the American Psychological Association (APA) for most of its history, until recently.

For some folks though, this disorder is now the "non-disorder formerly known as disorder." It was a disorder in the DSM I and II published by the APA. But in the last publication, DSM IV, it was removed as a disorder. Why?

Protests by gay rights activists against the APA began in 1970 when the organization held its convention in San Francisco. The activists disrupted the conference by interrupting speakers and shouting down and ridiculing psychiatrists who viewed homosexuality as a mental disorder. In 1971, gay rights activist Frank Kameny worked with the Gay Liberation Front collective to demonstrate against the APA's convention. At the 1971 conference, Kameny grabbed the microphone and yelled, "Psychiatry is the enemy incarnate. Psychiatry has waged a relentless war of extermination against us. You may take this as a declaration of war against you." To put is bluntly, the American Psychological Association buckled and caved to protestors, and therefore have no legitimacy now.

So the APA can be, and is, wrong. The current APA thinks that they were "wrong back then," and "right now." But certainly, the opposite can be true, that is was right back then and wrong now. I think that they were right before and wrong now because they now fear liberal retaliation and politcial correctness that did not exist before.

 

Feel free to explain how it's not a choice.

 

I did....

 

Ran out of arguments have you?

 

That would imply, that the human race has the natural purpose of reproducing, but biology doesn't work that way. There are no natural purposes for species, they simply exist, coexist, procreate, mutate, die. Species with higher cognitive functions do design their own purpuse, but that does in no way mean that that's their natural and "normal" way of living. So speaking of disorders is simply a subjective way of determining what's normal and what isn't and naturally is ground for discussion, since no one should have the authority to define a disorder based on their nonreflective opinion.

 

so it would be interesting to find out the reason why it is no longer considered a disorder then ....

I'll give you a clue .... science has advanced considerably in recent years.

 

So, homosexuality is NOT a choice but engaging in homosexual acts IS a choice. Gotcha!

The OP contradicts the thread title.

 

Homosexual orientation isn't a choice. Homosexual behavior is a choice. "Homosexuality" is commonly used to refer to both the orientation and the behavior. When people say that "homosexuality" isn't a choice, they're talking about the orientation, not the behavior.

So the question to wrestle with is whether or not a person of same-sex orientation should choose to act on it in a consensual expression of that orientation through behavior. Why not? If the answer is "because it's a sin", I'll thank you to keep your religion where it belongs - in governance of your own life. It has no place interferring with the freedom of others to choose their own beliefs and behavior.

 

In other words, "Sorry extreme social conservatives, but homosexual behavior IS something people have the freedom to choose". If you don't like that other people enjoy the freedom to do things that you don't approve, sucks to be you.

 

Try not to stop reading at the first sentence of someone's post.

He said attraction is not a choice, the act of having any kind of sex is a choice.

 

Hey idiot. The question of "choice" is only relevant if all people have the same temptation. In other words, if all people were equally tempted to have anal sex, you could say that those who have anal sex have made a choice. However, not everyone is equally tempted to engage in anal sex. Those who are tempted did not make the choice to be tempted.

Then again, I could be wrong about all of this. If so, how often do you think about sucking ****?