Feelings about homosexuality without religion

ON a more serious note...you all know how I feel about the gay community.

Viva gays!

I think people have a problem with it just like they have a problem with anything else they don't understand.

Well I am not like that so why are you? I am normal and I am not like that so that must make you not normal.

People don't like to stray from what they know. We hear all this crap on the "causes of homosexuality" when in fact, it's been around since the beginning of man so really, IS there a cause? Yeah. We were created. Some genes did something a little different. I got brown hair instead of blonde. I like women instead of men. That's the "cause".

The argument continues with well, if it's "Normal" and "natural" to be gay then why can't a gay couple reproduce? That's what sex was originally designed for, right?

Well......
Oral sex doesn't cause procreation yet it is totally acceptable. Manual masturbation doesn't cause procreation yet it is totally acceptable. Anal sex among straight couples doesn't cause procreation yet it is far more acceptable than gay sex.

We've created imaginary boundaries for sex that we only obey when others are listening. You ask people what they do in their bedrooms and even the most candid folk will leave out 90% of the kinky **** they do.

So yes, I do think that people would have a problem with it sans religion.

Some people have a problem with everything.

To put it another way -- I've been thinking of this community as a more or less self-sustaining entity. I think that if there was another community over the mountain that this community didn't know much about, that's where the prejudice would set in. And if it happened that the original community didn't have any gay people, and that this over-the-mountain community did, that could be fodder for demonization. "Men have sex with men! Can you believe it? We are SO much better than them." (Or, "I was spying on them once and saw that they shoot arrows with their LEFT hands. Something is wrong with those people." Or, "Did you see the color of their hair? It's RED, I swear to you. WEIRD, man, weird.")

Re: Feelings about homosexuality without religion


I do think so.
I think that it is a "diffrent" thing. And people fear and question what is diffrent from themselves.

I dont think though, that the pure hatred we see today would exist.
I think it would just be more of a 'squeemish ' feeling.. or .. at least I would hope so.

yeah shewolf, I think you kinda get what I'm saying.

Someone might feel squimish about it, especially if they'd tried it and it hurt or something.

But, if it did hurt a person, and they then said to John..."being gay is wrong" and the other person said why the answer would be "well, because I did it and it hurt" or "I did it and I got poop on my penis, and it was yucky" so they are talking from their personal experience. But if someone else was there and said "well, from my personal experience, I tried it and didn't particularly like it, but it didn't hurt and there was no poop" Also a third person might say, "I've done it and I think it's the most wonderful thing in the world" A 4th and 5th person may say they've never tried it at all.

The thing there is, someone said it was wrong, because it hurt them and they didn't like it. But that could be disputed.

If someone says "It's wrong because God said it is and because of that you're going to burn in hell for all eternity" or whatever punishment different religions would say their diety would dole out.

God's neighbor can't come forward and say, "God thinks it's wrong, but I don't. I think God just didn't like it when he tried it"

See, there's no comeback to someone who say "God says it wrong right here in this book that has all the rules God told us to follow"

Religion was the thing that made something different enough to say it's wrong.

Now I guess if someone who got squimish about it way back at the clean slate stage also happened to be hugely charismatic, they could give a good fight for gaydom being wrong, but based on "It's yucky, I don't like it, and I have such a way with words I can get you to agree with me" However, sooner or later (and sooner would be my bet) someone else with an equally strong ability to convince people would say "I don't think it's yucky, I think it's great! If you don't believe me, try it. Then, do it or don't do it, whatever you want. If you don't want to try it that's fine too, but it's not yucky."

When it's said it different, well, again, I have a problem thinking it's as different as all that. There's a lot of gay people out there pretending to be straight, but I don't think there's a lot of straight people out there pretending to be gay.

Getting back to the large breasts example. If one person says "Large breasts are the best", well, that person's being different, because if you took the whole world, large breasts may very well not be the be all and end all of attractiveness. If you don't agree with that, substitute "large nose" for "large breasts"

Anyway, many other people would be saying, nuh uh, large breasts aren't that great, long legs are....no, I think butts are where it's at...
No one would tell another that they are different and wrong...

Let's say though in some religious book followed by millions it says "He that longs after the boudacious tatas is just plain wrong, and will burn in hell for all eternity.

well......it's WRONG...GOD SAID SO!

soz, I get your examples about red hair, left handedness, but like I said above, I believe if someone said, "He had red hair! That's weird" someone else would say..."I dunno, I think it's kinda cool" and the others, hearing the 2 viewpoints would say, "whatever"

However, if the person who said it was weird found some line from their religious text that God didn't approve of red hair, that would be the clincher.

OK, why, when blacks were brought over as slaves from Africa, was that ok? Because God said it was...God even said something bad about people with dark skin...

slates don't stay clean very long at all, and one person may not care about God at all, but their neighbor may, and if you neighbor thinks God doesn't approve of gays, you know you really don't have an argument with him, because he'll just tell you it's God saying that.

Not when it's us vs. them. The one who says "I dunno..." would be rounded on and told, "Hey, are you a Commuityoneite or a Twocommunitier? What's your problem?"

I mean obviously this is all theoretical, there are a zillion variables that haven't been accounted for and could send things one way or another.

But all kinds of studies have shown that the us vs. them impulse is very, very strong in humans. And that joining together in disparaging another group (if not outright going to war with them) is a bonding mechanism. (In fact, I read somewhere that a major part of the appeal of message boards is taking sides one way or another -- as in, it's not about arguing with the person you disagree with, but the bonding that occurs when OTHER people disagree with that person, too. But I digress.)



I don't disagree, exactly, I just think the cause and effect would be reversed. I think that, in the above situation, if the Communityoneite wasn't sufficiently cowed, the browbeater would then add, "The other day I was up on the mountain peak and the Almighty Rock spoke to me and said 'Redheads are evil.' Yep. So careful there bub, if you get all sympathetic to their evil ways, the Almighty Rock's gonna smite you. I'm just saying."

I think humans made up all this religion stuff partly for the express purpose of reinforcing their prejudices, making their petty stuff seem legitimate. But I think the prejudices would've been there whether religion was part of the picture or not.

Which is pretty comical seeing as how Jesus was not white skinned.

He wasn't?!!!

boy howdy, I gotta think about this one....

HA!

See! No way! No way!

I found this picture of Jesus as proof.

Now you tell me this guy isn't white!




I'll be waiting for your apology....

My son just lent me (which is to say, has insisted I read) "The Polite Revolution" by John Ibbitson. He and sozobe seem to be on the same page. To quote a paragraph on page 3:

"...intolerance [is] so deeply ingrained in human culture that for millennia we have shaped our caste systems and fought our wars based on them...It is the intolerance of the clan, which stipulates that the further a person is removed from your own family, tribe, village, the likelier that person is to be alien and threatening. It is intolerance toward the other, whose God is not yours, whose economic system is not yours, whose sexuality is not yours, whose language is not yours."

I think that some people who are not completely sure of their own sexuality may become homophobic, as a reaction formation to their impulses. Religion offers those people an imprimatur to share those feeling with others.

There would still be homophobia even in the absence of religion.

Evangelical Christians, however, have taken what should be a minority opinion, and put it on steroids. The religious right has found that homophobia, and the denouncement of it in their holy books, is a polarizing issue that can be used to wield great political power. Nothing is more motivating than fear, and the evangelical Christian circles have done an incredible job of convincing the American electorate that it is their moral obligation to fight homosexuals' desire as equals in society, or their families will be destroyed. There are millions of Americans that believe that if I settle down with my boyfriend, earn a daily wage, pay my taxes, enjoy a variety of hobbies and travel, that somehow I am jeapordizing the health of the heterosexual nuclear family. WTFE

It also doesn't help that we have a president who all but sanctions hate-talk against homosexuals as speech that should be protected by the Constitution. This, because he knows who put him in office.

We are currently seeing a backlash against otherwise encouraging progress towards acceptance of all lifestyles, including homosexuality. But I do think that as people become more educated, and Christianity goes the way of Greek mythology, there will be progressively less homophobia.

It will never go away completely... there are still Americans, albeit very few, who think blacks should be re-enslaved (you can, in fact, read the Bible to support slavery in both the Old and New Testaments). But I do think and hope that homophobia one day finds its place in that category.

Re: Feelings about homosexuality without religion
Sadly yes I do as there are any number of tribal / sociological / cultural "forces" outside of religion that influence us to reject / suspect / condemn those that do not conform to whatever the popular normatives might be.

I'm also not sure how one could simply remove religion (even as a thought experiment) from the overall tribal / sociological / cultural "forces" as it's such an integral part.

I suggest religion is much more a reflection of ourselves than it is an external delineated manifestation.

Re: Feelings about homosexuality without religion
Gee, ask an atheist if you want to know that one. Or ask someone who has never heard of religion what they think about 2 men or 2 women kissing or engaging in sex.

I have met people of all backgrounds both with and without religion who are strangely afeared of homosexuals.

Re: Feelings about homosexuality without religion


Yes, but do not forget we live in a society irrevocably touched by a Christian world-view. There are very VERY few people who grew up without some form of religious indoctrination. I hope that changes in the future... but it absolutely has bearing on any individual living in the United States today.

Re: Feelings about homosexuality without religion


Sturgis, edgars immediate response to me prompted my comment that even if one is an atheist, and/or has had no religious training, the presence of organized religion still has an effect on people, at least that is my belief.

Of course everyone has heard of religion, but I thinking of what reason a homophobe would eventually give, if pressed, what the objection is.

Not all of the time, but I really believe most of the time, if a person is questioned to the point where they admit they think homosexuality is wrong...well then, why? Then comes the "because that's what God says.

I seem to remember being taught in psych 1A (?) at a state university that homosexuality was a 'deviation'. Well, it's been a long time, that would have been 1961. But we also read Kinsey, so my memory may be confused. Maybe that was from my religion - but my religion didn't tell me much, sex being barely talked about by the good sisters who taught my girls' academy, much less homosexuality specifically.

But I read, y'know, and have had a pretty fair variety of friends over the years, and grew to understand the word deviation as piffle.

I tend to agree with anyone who suggests virulent homophobia is not only fear based but that the fear is about themselves, at least much of the time.

So, while agreeing generally with summaries that the phobia is basically one more human need to establish us versus them as a social construct, I think the situation also brings a component of 'don't make me you', both of those enhanced by religious proscription, but not necessitating it. I think the fear is primary.

oh my f king god

I have no idea how much religion plays in the disdain for homosexuality. As for me I say live and let live. Even though I frown upon it.

Then answer for us... why do you frown upon it? And I encourage you to continue to ask "Why?" to your answers to arrive at the true reason you feel that way.

I frown upon the consumption of pig's feet... but by "frown upon" I mean that it's not for me, but I have absolutely no problem with people who want to do it, nor do I believe that those who choose to eat pig's feet together be barred from entering a relationship together.