Thoughts on gay rights?

[Greg]

People are becoming afraid to teach their values to young people who are now exploring so many avenues believing they are all as good as any other. 

While I'll have more to read up on this, I thought these were interesting:

http://www.frc.org/issuebrief/new-study ... s-research (Statistics on Homosexual families with children).

And a separate one for non-nuclear families

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politic ... rimes.html

[Greg]

Can you really not see the huge difference between homosexuality and pedophilia?

One involves consenting adults, and the other doesn't, and that's a major difference between them.

Consent is a subjective term too. Consent has changed a lot over time and even looking at today, there are different ages of consent in different countries. Couldn't you make the case that someone younger is "mature" enough that they can consent? Whose age of consent is correct?

Again, what is worse, if I'm a 28 year old man, to have sexual relations with a 27 year old man, or a 17 year old female (assuming 18 is age of consent). Why is the one with the 17 year old worse if the consent is based on societies preference of the time?

[dualstow]

Consent is a subjective term too. Consent has changed a lot over time and even looking at today, there are different ages of consent in different countries. Couldn't you make the case that someone younger is "mature" enough that they can consent? Whose age of consent is correct?

Again, what is worse, if I'm a 28 year old man, to have sexual relations with a 27 year old man, or a 17 year old female (assuming 18 is age of consent). Why is the one with the 17 year old worse if the consent is based on societies preference of the time?

I think the short answer is, you have to draw the line somewhere. I think the age minimum in Brazil is 12. It's not that one of the examples is worse than the other. If you're a straight male, there's a good chance that sex with a 17-yr-old girl will feel more normal, and one feels what one feels. But, if it's statutory rape, then that would be the illegal choice of the two.

And of course, if something is illegal, that doesn't necessarily mean it's morally wrong. It's what someone decided was illegal. People smoke pot all the time. They take their chances with the possible legal repercussions from getting caught. Alan Turing, the man who cracked Nazi Germany's ENIGMA code and father of artificial intelligence, was chemically castrated because he was openly gay in Britain at a time when homesexuality was illegal.
I've often thought about how arbitrary it feels that we have the death penalty in some of our 50 states and not others, but I have never felt that a crime is more "wrong" in one state than in another.

[Michellebell]

Can you really not see the huge difference between homosexuality and pedophilia?

One involves consenting adults, and the other doesn't, and that's a major difference between them.

JAFS I have noticed some comparisons of these by several people here and I agree.  They are completely different.  Pedophilia is undoubtedly harmful to society and must be treated as such. 

Homosexuality is different than pedophilia, which occurs within heterosexuals as well as homosexuals... But as far as recognizing and striving for the most stable families, heterosexuality appears to me to be the best option, and our culture is no longer promoting it as such.

Honestly I am pretty embarrassed to be even saying these things, as I've always tried to be tolerant and open-minded.

[Fred]

Can you really not see the huge difference between homosexuality and pedophilia?

One involves consenting adults, and the other doesn't, and that's a major difference between them.

If "consenting adults" is the line you draw then I think you would have to be in favor of legally allowing polygamy.

If not, what would be the reason for it?

(For the record, I'm not against the idea on religious grounds myself since I'm not religious but just wonder what you think.)

[jafs]

And I am.

As well as polyandry and group marriages.

[jafs]

Can you really not see the huge difference between homosexuality and pedophilia?

One involves consenting adults, and the other doesn't, and that's a major difference between them.

Consent is a subjective term too. Consent has changed a lot over time and even looking at today, there are different ages of consent in different countries. Couldn't you make the case that someone younger is "mature" enough that they can consent? Whose age of consent is correct?
It's not a subjective term.

Age of consent is, almost unavoidably, a somewhat arbitrary line to draw, but it has to be done, as dualstow comments.  And, pedophilia is wrong because it involves children who are unable to understand and consent to sex.

There's no reason at all that homosexuality leads to pedophilia, any more than heterosexuality does, and so it's not a good reason to condemn homosexuals.



Again, what is worse, if I'm a 28 year old man, to have sexual relations with a 27 year old man, or a 17 year old female (assuming 18 is age of consent). Why is the one with the 17 year old worse if the consent is based on societies preference of the time?

[jafs]

Can you really not see the huge difference between homosexuality and pedophilia?

One involves consenting adults, and the other doesn't, and that's a major difference between them.

JAFS I have noticed some comparisons of these by several people here and I agree.  They are completely different.  Pedophilia is undoubtedly harmful to society and must be treated as such. 

Homosexuality is different than pedophilia, which occurs within heterosexuals as well as homosexuals... But as far as recognizing and striving for the most stable families, heterosexuality appears to me to be the best option, and our culture is no longer promoting it as such.

Honestly I am pretty embarrassed to be even saying these things, as I've always tried to be tolerant and open-minded.

I see no reason that a straight family is more likely to be stable than a gay or lesbian one.  Infidelity and divorce statistics among straight people show that pretty clearly.

Stable families are a good thing, if the families are happy ones, of course.

[Fred]

And I am.

As well as polyandry and group marriages.

Okay, now we are getting somewhere. Do you think this should be the universal law on planet earth? As long as it's between consenting adults and doesn't hurt anybody it should be allowed? If a group of people went off to live on an island because they believed in traditional morality as they see it, according to the Bible, and wanted to build a society on those principles, should they be left alone or should your view of morality be imposed on them?

[Michellebell]

I wonder if my sister will be happy as a lesbian.  She claims she's bisexual but hasn't tried dating any men.  Why would she when lesbianism is so "cool" these days?  But her first girlfriend had a lot of issues and tried to commit suicide several times.  Her next girlfriend struggled with gender identity and has been going back and forth between identifying as a female vs a male. 

I know another woman who married a woman and then left her because the relationship was so unstable.  She identified herself as a lesbian and became friends almost exclusively with lesbians.  When she started dating men again (she's married now), her friends were really angry at her and her boss even sexually harassed her.

You might say these are isolated cases, but I think they're still worth thinking about.  My sister may not know if she might actually like being in a relationship with a man.  I don't think she'd be able to attract a man honestly.  She is beautiful, tall and thin, blond...a classic beauty like Grace Kelly, but she looks like a lesbian (short hair, dresses like a boy, gets mistaken for a boy sometimes, etc.).  Shes also genius-level smart.

If she is that pretty, she shouldn't have any trouble attracting a man, unless her personality is quite off-putting. However, of course it would help if she dressed like a woman and grew her hair longer.

BTW, this is another way in which men and women are quite different. Most men are either straight or gay, and the straight ones don't have any interest in sex with another man. Women seem to be considerably more fluid in that regard.

My sister is objectively pretty but her style very much lowers her attractiveness to men right now, IMO.  My dad has said repeatedly that she looks much prettier with long hair but her mom says she likes it short.  She  looks like a lesbian and has joined with a group of friends that are very much into the whole gay/experimental scene. I see her having to branch away from that group to have a chance to date men.  She's also pretty shy so I see it being unlikely for her to get a boyfriend unless she makes more of an effort to attract men.  When she was growing up she seemed just like any other healthy little girl.  I don't even know how I'd broach the topic with her as she is a very sweet person and I don't want to sound harsh, but I would like her to at least try dating boys just to have a chance to make a fair comparison.

I agree women's preferences are much more fluid than men's.  I don't know if chose to be heterosexual, at least somewhat.  It's honestly hard for me to say for certain how it happened.

When I was in middle school I was more attracted to girls than boys.  I found the boys not as physically good-looking and also not fun to be around.  I noticed that a lot of other girls would talk about which ones were cute, and to me none of them were cute.  It could be because I started puberty later than some of the other girls. I also found some girls quite beautiful and was a little fixated on them.

Now we had a lot of homophobia in middle school as well.  I was horrified that I was attracted to girls and hoped that I wouldn't be gay.  When I got a little older I noticed that my attraction was more like 50/50 between the girls and the boys. But I noticed that other girls developed crushes on boys so I felt like I should too.  I'd actually look around at my classmates and try to pick the one or two that I felt I should fixate on.  If I felt attracted to any girls (I can still think of some), I tried to dismiss them as not an option.

By my twenties I'd say I had an 80-90% preference for men.  How much of that was my choice?  I don't know for sure, but I think that mental associations can play a role.  For example one person here said that we are not born with foot fetishes and stuff.  But if we continually associate sexual desire with one gender  we might actually be able to feel more genuine attraction to that gender. 

Now I'm sure there are lesbians out there that were horrified at their initial observations of being attracted to women, and maybe they made the same choices as me but realized that they were still more attracted to women.  And this doesn't explain what's going on with the cases where children growing up suffer from gender identity issues. I find those cases very sad. 

But I wonder if what seems to me like a recent celebration of gays may influence those who are more on the fence.

[jafs]

And I am.

As well as polyandry and group marriages.

Okay, now we are getting somewhere. Do you think this should be the universal law on planet earth? As long as it's between consenting adults and doesn't hurt anybody it should be allowed? If a group of people went off to live on an island because they believed in traditional morality as they see it, according to the Bible, and wanted to build a society on those principles, should they be left alone or should your view of morality be imposed on them?
I don't know about universal planet earth laws - that's a pretty big category.

But, yes, generally speaking, I find that consenting adults should be able to do as they like if they're not hurting other people.

[Michellebell]

Can you really not see the huge difference between homosexuality and pedophilia?

One involves consenting adults, and the other doesn't, and that's a major difference between them.

JAFS I have noticed some comparisons of these by several people here and I agree.  They are completely different.  Pedophilia is undoubtedly harmful to society and must be treated as such. 

Homosexuality is different than pedophilia, which occurs within heterosexuals as well as homosexuals... But as far as recognizing and striving for the most stable families, heterosexuality appears to me to be the best option, and our culture is no longer promoting it as such.

Honestly I am pretty embarrassed to be even saying these things, as I've always tried to be tolerant and open-minded.

I see no reason that a straight family is more likely to be stable than a gay or lesbian one.  Infidelity and divorce statistics among straight people show that pretty clearly.

Stable families are a good thing, if the families are happy ones, of course.

Infidelity and divorce statistics are significantly higher amongst homosexuals though, from the sources I have encountered. 

Now is this grounds to deny adoption rights to gay men who may indeed be one of the small minority that is able to stay committed?  It's not fair to them, but I wouldn't feel comfortable giving a baby or seeing a baby I care about to be adopted to a couple like that.

[Michellebell]

And I am.

As well as polyandry and group marriages.

Wow, I was surprised by this.  I watched quite a few episodes of Sister Wives, and I guess they seemed happy enough...but it was just unsettling to me.  I knew those women were jealous and really battling that continuously. 

Now I wonder if we will move in that direction.  I feel like all these options would make it harder to stay committed, but I had never even considered this before.  What would happen if "marriage" became such an open term?

[Libertarian666]

And I am.

As well as polyandry and group marriages.

Wow, I was surprised by this.  I watched quite a few episodes of Sister Wives, and I guess they seemed happy enough...but it was just unsettling to me.  I knew those women were jealous and really battling that continuously. 

Now I wonder if we will move in that direction.  I feel like all these options would make it harder to stay committed, but I had never even considered this before.  What would happen if "marriage" became such an open term?

I predict the first lawsuit will be launched any day now. All of the arguments against polygamy were used against gay marriage and failed, so it is only a matter of time before that is legal too.

Which is fine with me. Actually I would prefer that people be able to make their own marital contracts with whatever terms they prefer.

[Michellebell]

And I am.

As well as polyandry and group marriages.

Wow, I was surprised by this.  I watched quite a few episodes of Sister Wives, and I guess they seemed happy enough...but it was just unsettling to me.  I knew those women were jealous and really battling that continuously. 

Now I wonder if we will move in that direction.  I feel like all these options would make it harder to stay committed, but I had never even considered this before.  What would happen if "marriage" became such an open term?

I predict the first lawsuit will be launched any day now. All of the arguments against polygamy were used against gay marriage and failed, so it is only a matter of time before that is legal too.

Which is fine with me. Actually I would prefer that people be able to make their own marital contracts with whatever terms they prefer.

I don't know.  I feel like if people can make it up however they want, we might as well just do away with the whole concept of marriage.

[jafs]

JAFS I have noticed some comparisons of these by several people here and I agree.  They are completely different.  Pedophilia is undoubtedly harmful to society and must be treated as such. 

Homosexuality is different than pedophilia, which occurs within heterosexuals as well as homosexuals... But as far as recognizing and striving for the most stable families, heterosexuality appears to me to be the best option, and our culture is no longer promoting it as such.

Honestly I am pretty embarrassed to be even saying these things, as I've always tried to be tolerant and open-minded.

I see no reason that a straight family is more likely to be stable than a gay or lesbian one.  Infidelity and divorce statistics among straight people show that pretty clearly.

Stable families are a good thing, if the families are happy ones, of course.

Infidelity and divorce statistics are significantly higher amongst homosexuals though, from the sources I have encountered. 

Now is this grounds to deny adoption rights to gay men who may indeed be one of the small minority that is able to stay committed?  It's not fair to them, but I wouldn't feel comfortable giving a baby or seeing a baby I care about to be adopted to a couple like that.

Please share your sources.

Something like 70-80%of straight couples experience infidelity, and about 50% of straight marriages end in divorce, last time I looked.  Those are staggeringly high numbers.

And, until recently, gay/lesbians didn't have the legal right to marry in all states.  We should wait until some time has passed in which they have that right across the country to compare statistics with straight couples, I'd think.

Why not?  If I were working in the adoption field, sexual orientation wouldn't be a major factor for me in placing children.  I'd be concerned about things like financial stability, a healthy/happy relationship of the couple, thoughtfulness about how to raise children, etc.  Also, I'm not sure why you think that gay male couples are more stable than lesbian ones - in my experience, that's not necessarily true.

[jafs]

And I am.

As well as polyandry and group marriages.

Wow, I was surprised by this.  I watched quite a few episodes of Sister Wives, and I guess they seemed happy enough...but it was just unsettling to me.  I knew those women were jealous and really battling that continuously. 

Now I wonder if we will move in that direction.  I feel like all these options would make it harder to stay committed, but I had never even considered this before.  What would happen if "marriage" became such an open term?

If the people involved are consenting adults, I see no problem with them.

Generally, I feel that more ways for people to structure relationships will mean a greater possibility of people creating stable, functional ones.  Monogamous straight marriages aren't for everybody, and the success/failure rate of them indicates that they're difficult to maintain.  Why not let people experiment with other structures?

[Mountaineer]

And I am.

As well as polyandry and group marriages.

Wow, I was surprised by this.  I watched quite a few episodes of Sister Wives, and I guess they seemed happy enough...but it was just unsettling to me.  I knew those women were jealous and really battling that continuously. 

Now I wonder if we will move in that direction.  I feel like all these options would make it harder to stay committed, but I had never even considered this before.  What would happen if "marriage" became such an open term?

If the people involved are consenting adults, I see no problem with them.

Generally, I feel that more ways for people to structure relationships will mean a greater possibility of people creating stable, functional ones.  Monogamous straight marriages aren't for everybody, and the success/failure rate of them indicates that they're difficult to maintain.  Why not let people experiment with other structures?

A couple of pertinent quotes from the most popular book ever:

Psalm 81
11 “But my people did not listen to my voice;
    Israel would not submit to me.
12 So I gave them over to their stubborn hearts,
    to follow their own counsels.
13 Oh, that my people would listen to me,
    that Israel would walk in my ways!

Romans 3
11    no one understands;
    no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
    no one does good,
    not even one.”
13 “Their throat is an open grave;
    they use their tongues to deceive.”
“The venom of asps is under their lips.”

... M

[jafs]

Since we're not a theocracy, Biblical verses have little relevance to this discussion.

[Mountaineer]

Since we're not a theocracy, Biblical verses have little relevance to this discussion.

You had best pray hope believe think you are correct! 

And, it never ceases to amaze me how the "tolerants" can quote from any old source on the planet, but when the most popular book ever is quoted, and on point to a subject being discussed, it is mocked.  Tolerance my ass!  (er. donkey). 

... M

[jafs]

I didn't "mock" it.

I just pointed out that this question is a question of how our constitutionally-based government treats the issue, not a theological conversation.

Because of our constitution, you have the right in this country to believe whatever you believe, as far as religion goes.

What's wrong with polyandry, polygamy or group marriages?  And, you don't seriously think that anything I might say would persuade Mountaineer or other folks that believe as he does of anything different about this issue, do you?

People have pointed out that the proscription against homosexuality is in Leviticus, which also contains a lot of other proscriptions which have been discarded/ignored by Christians, that the verses in question are in a certain context, in which giving away your virgin daughters to be raped is seen as more moral than homosexuality, that there is no Biblical proscription of lesbianism, that Biblical marriage was often polygamous, that Jesus said nothing at all about homosexuality, etc.  All of which has no effect whatsoever on people who believe as Mountaineer believes.

And, he (and others) has the right to believe as he likes about the issue, whether it's well supported/reasoned or not. 

It's just not a fruitful discussion, when theology enters into the picture.  And, our founding document is the Constitution, so that's what should apply here.

[Michellebell]

I see no reason that a straight family is more likely to be stable than a gay or lesbian one.  Infidelity and divorce statistics among straight people show that pretty clearly.

Stable families are a good thing, if the families are happy ones, of course.

Infidelity and divorce statistics are significantly higher amongst homosexuals though, from the sources I have encountered. 

Now is this grounds to deny adoption rights to gay men who may indeed be one of the small minority that is able to stay committed?  It's not fair to them, but I wouldn't feel comfortable giving a baby or seeing a baby I care about to be adopted to a couple like that.

Please share your sources.

Something like 70-80%of straight couples experience infidelity, and about 50% of straight marriages end in divorce, last time I looked.  Those are staggeringly high numbers.

And, until recently, gay/lesbians didn't have the legal right to marry in all states.  We should wait until some time has passed in which they have that right across the country to compare statistics with straight couples, I'd think.

Why not?  If I were working in the adoption field, sexual orientation wouldn't be a major factor for me in placing children.  I'd be concerned about things like financial stability, a healthy/happy relationship of the couple, thoughtfulness about how to raise children, etc.  Also, I'm not sure why you think that gay male couples are more stable than lesbian ones - in my experience, that's not necessarily true.

I already shared some here.  From what I read, I'd say the gay male couples are the least stable.  Lesbian couples are a little more stable, and heterosexual marriages are the most.  One of the sources I linked here talked about divorce rates of married gay and straight couples in Sweden.  I would search for them again but I don't have time at the moment.  But just read several of the links posted here for statistics and surveys of the grown children of gay parents.

[Michellebell]

<snip> We are as a culture moving toward celebrating homosexuality.  It's all over our media and seen as almost an elite club to me.  I don't believe homosexuals should have equal rights to adoption as much as committed married heterosexual couples.  Intolerant?  Yes, and maybe I'm wrong.  But as of right now that is my opinion. <end snip>

Michellebell,

Eugenics is no longer popular like it was in the early 1900s; it seemed to reach its peak in Nazi Germany but may be making a comeback via assisted reproductive technology.  Those who are concerned about over populating the planet (typically those more liberal in their thoughts and actions, e.g. the media, e.g. acedemia) need something to replace eugenics (an aim of which was to create smarter peope who will save us) without the stigma of the word eugenics.  It appears they have chosen to make abortion and homosexuality glamorous as the current strategy to save us (via limiting successful births) from ourselves.  You may wish to counsel your sister about other possibilities for her chosen lifestyle and help her see how she is likely being manipulated by pop culture.  All my opinion.

... M

Mountaineer, this concept was always something I kind of wondered but had never heard anyone actually say it.  Obviously you are opposed to these cultural changes.  What do you suppose is our best solution to our overpopulation and overconsumption problems?

(Sorry if it's a loaded question.  bTW I have three kids and want four, but I justify it by noticing that most kids today are born to the more poor population and so many are out of wedlock, I feel like I'm doing good by having children in a stable environment - I know it's not the most logical and probably just a way of feeling better about selfishly wanting a big family).

[dualstow]

I'm not religious at all, nor do I know the Bible.  And I am in favor of gay people having access to all the same things that I have access to.  So I support same-sex marriage. (I don't support polyandry though).

But I think it is not really true that the Bible has little relevance to the discussion.  It is a book that forms the cultural backbone for many in the U.S..  To reflexively dismiss it demonstrates little regard for those who attach importance to it, which, IMO, is not really an effective way of persuading.

The Bible may form the cultural backbone for many, but maybe it shouldn't. Maybe it's way too convenient a vehicle for some to hold onto their prejudices.

[jafs]

Infidelity and divorce statistics are significantly higher amongst homosexuals though, from the sources I have encountered. 

Now is this grounds to deny adoption rights to gay men who may indeed be one of the small minority that is able to stay committed?  It's not fair to them, but I wouldn't feel comfortable giving a baby or seeing a baby I care about to be adopted to a couple like that.

Please share your sources.

Something like 70-80%of straight couples experience infidelity, and about 50% of straight marriages end in divorce, last time I looked.  Those are staggeringly high numbers.

And, until recently, gay/lesbians didn't have the legal right to marry in all states.  We should wait until some time has passed in which they have that right across the country to compare statistics with straight couples, I'd think.

Why not?  If I were working in the adoption field, sexual orientation wouldn't be a major factor for me in placing children.  I'd be concerned about things like financial stability, a healthy/happy relationship of the couple, thoughtfulness about how to raise children, etc.  Also, I'm not sure why you think that gay male couples are more stable than lesbian ones - in my experience, that's not necessarily true.

I already shared some here.  From what I read, I'd say the gay male couples are the least stable.  Lesbian couples are a little more stable, and heterosexual marriages are the most.  One of the sources I linked here talked about divorce rates of married gay and straight couples in Sweden.  I would search for them again but I don't have time at the moment.  But just read several of the links posted here for statistics and surveys of the grown children of gay parents.

From Wikipedia, rates of divorce of gay/lesbian couples are the same or lower (sometimes substantially lower) than divorce rates of heterosexual couples in all countries mentioned except for Sweden/Norway.

And, surprisingly to me, lesbian couples are actually divorcing at a slightly higher rate than gay male couples a lot of the time.