1
   

homosexuality is not 'unnatural'

 
 
goodfielder
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Nov, 2005 04:16 am
Too true Ray - especially when the words are used as weapons.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Nov, 2005 07:17 am
Q1. If "homosexuality" is deemed to be "natural" does this imply that homosexuals have "rights" ? (We should note that "racism" may also be "natural").

Q2. Whether or not homosexuality is "natural" is it not its current "fashionable status" that is the real problem for the sceptical bored majority?
0 Replies
 
Acquiunk
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Nov, 2005 07:38 am
Ray wrote:
The fact that something exists suggests that the certain something exists in nature. "Natural" or "unnatural" arguments are vague.


In the context of this discussion, naturalness is defined as having a genetic cause. Sexuality most likely has an underlying genetic cause because that is how we, as an animal species, reproduce. But as genes can not determine the gender of a sexual partner, only initiate and probably regulate the desire to behave sexually, the chosen partner is most probably a culturally determined decision. This does not mean that any sexual orientation is valid or invalid. That validity, or if you will the legitimacy, of the attraction of one individual to another is also a cultural decision. If homosexuality were simply a genetically based behavior, it would have disappeared long ago because the activity is not reproductive. It is still here, quite healthy, and those with that orientation feel quite comfortable with themselves. Which is perhaps the strongest argument for a non genetic basis.

We should be very leery about claiming a genetic cause for any behavior, for this is the favorite argument of racists.
0 Replies
 
Ray
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 Nov, 2005 02:03 pm
Yeah, there have been a lot of claims about genetic basis for a lot of things. I think that some things are a combination of both genetics and the environment. I guess the question to some of them is, which one has the most impact. Racists twist facts; they believe in an invalid prescriptive statement, and that's why they're so stupid.
0 Replies
 
raheel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2005 02:42 am
how can homosexuality be natural when it stops us from actualising our human potential of reproduction? and thereforekeeps us from moving towards perfection?
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2005 10:53 am
raheel

Have you ever heard of the second law of thermodynamics ?......all systems naturally tend to a state of maximim disorder. Your concept of "perfection" is clearly pseudo-religious and is meaningful only to those who observe the world through a particular set of prescriptive spectacles.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Nov, 2005 01:09 pm
It would seem to me that, in a sense, both homosexuality and heterosexuality have their bases in our genetic compositions--otherwise neither dispositions would exist. It would seem that genetically-based compulsive behavior is a harder version of genetic determinism. What, then, about people with very weak libidos, the so-called a-sexuals? Are they genetically designed? And perhaps a-sexuality, homosexuality, as well as the masturbation so prevalent among higher primates, DO contribute to the survival of a species. I'm thinking of the "problem" of overpopulating a niche. Then, again, I've heard that masturbation helps to maintain, or increase, the individual's sperm count (?).
0 Replies
 
raheel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2005 12:44 pm
fresco wrote:
raheel

Have you ever heard of the second law of thermodynamics ?......all systems naturally tend to a state of maximim disorder. Your concept of "perfection" is clearly pseudo-religious and is meaningful only to those who observe the world through a particular set of prescriptive spectacles.


do ypou care to explain/ expand on this?
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2005 01:21 pm
raheel

You first ! What do you mean by perfection ?
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2005 01:40 pm
Laughing
0 Replies
 
Sturgis
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2005 01:48 pm
fresco wrote:

Q2. Whether or not homosexuality is "natural" is it not its current "fashionable status" that is the real problem for the sceptical bored majority?



Homosexuality fashionable? What la-la dream land world are you living in? As a homosexual male I have to tell you that I have yet to find homosexuality to be fashionable. Perhaps to the heterosexual people it is. Perhaps with the distorted views offered from Queer Eye for Straight Guys and Queer as Folk and Will and Grace and a handful of other media made farces heterosexuals find homosexuals to be fashionable and the be all and end all. Let me tell you it ain't real and it ain't true.

Homosexuals are the same as heterosexuals in every thing that matters. We love, we have interest in sports, we can be fashion un-conscious, we can have no idea how to cook, we can be unable to decorate a room or set a table in just the same manner in which a heterosexual can be a fantastic cook, a decorator a clothing designer etc.



Homsosexuality fashionable? Ha!
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2005 01:54 pm
I agree, Sturgis. I think Fresco is, understandably, responding to the "reality" defined by "Hollywood." I have gay friends and relatives who conform to none of those stereotypes, yet I, too, thought Fresco's statement was realistic. Thanks for the correction.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2005 02:38 pm
Perhaps I should qualify the word "fashionable".

It is certainly the case, at least in the UK, that the media has raised the status of homosexuals from "curiosity" to "celebrity". Mr Humphreys the camp caricature from The ubiquitous show "Are You Being Served" is typical of such a "movement" repeated in many other shows. Apart from the media we have fashionable manifestations such as "Gay Pride" marches, "the Pink Pound", and the demand for "Gay Rights", such as marriage, adoption and ordination. It is this current "surge" which I am calling "fashion", and like any fashion it has a limited lifespan.

I do not deny that homosexuals deserve to live as they wish but any claims they may have on the word "natural" will be evaluated by the heterosexual cynic against the alternative word "fashion".
0 Replies
 
raheel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2005 05:16 pm
fresco wrote:
raheel

You first ! What do you mean by perfection ?


the actualisation of all our potencies - those of our human part and the realisation of the Self.

our human potencies include all basic human instincts
our spiritual potencies are all the qualities associated with God
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2005 06:11 pm
raheel,

You confirm a particular religious outlook.

From a non-religious perspective "disorder" is the "norm". The 2nd law.... entropy/disorder increases with time is deemed to give the direction of "time". Even if we define "life" as a self organization structure which transcends entropy "for a time" the end result is the same.

As for "self" (which I note you write as "Self") which
common experience sees as absent when we are asleep, philosophical views differ on its status from "a concept evoked by social circumstance" to "a committee of squabbling voices". Those who are spiritually inclined may see the absence of "self" as a valid spiritual goal and even advocate celibacy as instrumental in that pursuit.

Now there may be a general utilitarian argument that sexual procreation is "required" for the continuation of the species but any religious or spiritual "requirement" is entirely arbitrary. We should also note that with the possibility of cloning even the utilitarian argument potentially breaks down.

Finally, if homosexuality is deemed "unnatural" by clerics in general it is interesting to note its apparent prevalence amongst them ! Indeed the pre-occupation with sexual matters in general by clerics seems little more than a naive coping behaviour where animal instincts are channelled into self perpetuating social structures. Clerics then take a prominant role in the pecking order and function as self appointed consultants with the power to bend the rules from time to time.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Nov, 2005 06:38 pm
And they say I'm nuts.Sheesh!

But just fancy not taking on the divine nature of womanhood and being able to at least get a score draw.They are such lovely little darlings.The uncertainty principle is child's play by comparison.
I've seen them jump through quanta at the speed of light just by mentioning investment on the commodities future's market and that isn't all that difficult to do.
0 Replies
 
kosmos-SErbia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 08:36 am
I so do not agree that homosexuality is natural.
we're made to have relationships with different pole.
We can take homosexuality like a NATURE's mistake.
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 08:41 am
kosmos-SErbia wrote:
I so do not agree that homosexuality is natural.
we're made to have relationships with different pole.
We can take homosexuality like a NATURE's mistake.


Like your "homo rainbow" avatar.
0 Replies
 
kosmos-SErbia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 09:50 am
oh it's not homo....... Very Happy
i'm so not from that story..
0 Replies
 
the prince
 
  1  
Reply Fri 11 Nov, 2005 12:44 pm
kosmos-SErbia wrote:
I so do not agree that homosexuality is natural.
we're made to have relationships with different pole.
We can take homosexuality like a NATURE's mistake.


Thank god for this mistake I say....
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.73 seconds on 11/17/2024 at 07:28:05