Religion and Homosexuality

Ayana Sioux:

My purpose for posting that was solely because Dru made a comment about what the bible says about reproduction and I was saying that I had to agree with the bible on those terms because I do believe that's our main purpose, to reproduce. If not, there would be no "us". There would be nothing.

Almost a quarter of all gay couples are raising a child or children, according to studies/censuses done in the last few years, e.g [1] [2] [3] (in that last one, it suggests 33% of lesbians and 20% of gay men are parents.) So, again, I don't see the relation between sexuality and parenthood.

@ Alex; periphery.
I think the flaw in that argument is "purpose." Purpose implies some sort of moral, good obligation, and nature/evolution/science/etc. is not a moral or value. It's simply a statement of fact; an observation of historically how species progress. As soon as religious people (or any anti-gay people) start talking about purpose, they're no longer talking plainly about facts, but their opinion, which is reproduction is good (as opposed to the fact that reproduction drives survival of the fittest- a principle some people may actually not support).

@ Alex; periphery.
Not everyone takes it that way. That is depended on the person. And whether someone who's a part of a religion makes that argument or not, it has nothing to do with homosexuality as a whole in many religions because other teachings of the religion are against it, other than the purpose of reproduction.

Also, it's not just a homosexual think because homosexuals can choose to have and raise children. I think as a whole most people tend to disfavor couples that choose not to have children.

RE: homosexuals not being able to reproduce and stalling evolution - Homosexuality Will Lead to Humanity's Enslavement by Ducks. A bit off topic (though not quite because it exposes the absurdity of most arguments about how homosexuality is 'against' evolution), and probably most people will have already read it, but still incredibly hilarious.

kafka.:

RE: homosexuals not being able to reproduce and stalling evolution - Homosexuality Will Lead to Humanity's Enslavement by Ducks. A bit off topic (though not quite because it exposes the absurdity of most arguments about how homosexuality is 'against' evolution), and probably most people will have already read it, but still incredibly hilarious.

I think what annoys me more than the obvious is that she doesn't know the actual mating rituals of ducks...considering that during mating season, male ducks will forcibly mate with any female duck who appears to be alone...regardless of species or whether they already have ducklings...

joan.:

I think what annoys me more than the obvious is that she doesn't know the actual mating rituals of ducks...considering that during mating season, male ducks will forcibly mate with any female duck who appears to be alone...regardless of species or whether they already have ducklings...

I'm so happy I'm not the only person who thought of that.

I also hate the idea of species x being further evolved than species y, like we're beating ducks in a sports game or something. Each species is perfectly evolved to live and reproduce in it's own niche. We're not "further" evolved than any other species.

Ayana Sioux:

Also, it's not just a homosexual think because homosexuals can choose to have and raise children.

Of course; that's congruent with what I was saying.

Ayana Sioux:

I think as a whole most people tend to disfavor couples that choose not to have children.

Do you have any sources for this? I'd never really noticed any stigma attached to choosing not to have children.

Kurtni:

I'm so happy I'm not the only person who thought of that.

I also hate the idea of species x being further evolved than species y, like we're beating ducks in a sports game or something. Each species is perfectly evolved to live and reproduce in it's own niche. We're not "further" evolved than any other species.

It's like going to Usain Bolt and being all..."Well, you're fast...for a human. Cheetahs are vastly superior to you and I don't want to pit MY children against those cheetah babies for school places. Thanks a lot, you lazy bastard. NOW STOP BEING SO SLOW AND BEAT THE FUCKING CHEETAH!"

@ Alex; periphery.
I don't think that's something someone would take a poll on, really.

Alex; periphery.:

Do you have any sources for this? I'd never really noticed any stigma attached to choosing not to have children.

I think there's definitely a stigma against couples opting not to have kids - it being weird or strange or wrong, if they are longterm / committed - and them being weird or strange or wrong if they aren't avowedly longterm / committed - it's a theme played out again and again in media/entertainment, which both reflects social anxieties/preoccupations and reinforces them, obviously.

But that's minor compared to a woman who doesn't want to have children, who is still seen as some kind of an unnatural harpy who needs fixing and will never be as valuable or fulfilled as a mother (or a father, or a childless man) - in Australia there are still comments made about the Prime Minister being unfit to understand/act in certain areas because she is "childless" - there's a whole area of language ("barren" etc) devoted to lack-of-children being a flaw, rather than that they are a person without children / people with children being a person plus something [children]. Similar to the idea of a woman never being fulfilled/happy without a man, I don't think it's a stigma which is reversed - bachelor or non-father, a guy can be footloose and fancy free, for the most part.

I'm also not certain whether there are studies done, but most women have a wealth of anecdotal evidence about the idea of 'mother privilege', which is the social advantage that revealing they are a mother brings them (particularly where they were losing points for, e.g., an unfeminine, poor or non-white appearance). Obviously motherhood brings a lot of challenges and there are other stigmas that can counter the 'privilege' (i.e. being a single mother or teen/young mother) but society likes and approves of mothers and is deeply suspicious, still, of a woman who says she is not interested in being an incubator like they trained her to be.

But tying this back to homosexuality, most of the arguments I see against gay partnerships do centre around or stem from that they can't have children, and that this factor means they are unnatural and invalid (or forever less-valid) compared to the hypothetical fertile heterosexual couple.

@ Alex; periphery.
pravda. pretty much said what I was going to about women being seen as "less womanly" for not wanting children. I've been told myself not to worry that there's 'still time' and I'm 25. It's ridiculous how much people think being a woman is automatically 'child-bearer'.

If a woman doesn't want children, people always want to know 'why'. Like they need to justify it.

@ the drupocalypse.
Yeah and then they make assinine comments like "be careful you might turn into that crazy cat woman".

I personally think that if people are in love they shouldn't have to get smacked with a Bible and told that God supposedly hates them. Why would God hate gays/lesbians/or bisexuals if tells us to love one another? But that's just my opinion.

Honestly I think love is love.. Doesn't matter if your straight gay lesbian bisexual pan sexual poly sexual or etc I really hate how people are so damn judge mental. God didn't put us here on earth to critize and bash people whom are attract to the same gender. I'm bisexual and I'm a Christian. I go to church three times a week. Anyways I mean jeez love is love no matter what gender it's with. This is only me stating my opinions

Here's a quick pearl of wisdom from the newly-elected Pope Francis: "Let's not be naive, we're not talking about a simple political battle; [gay marriage] is a destructive pretension against the plan of God. We are not talking about a mere bill, but rather a machination of the Father of Lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God."

Being homosexual isn't a choice! but homophobia is thats something that should be spreading across the world. A lot of homophobic do tend to consider them-selves religious. You can choose your religion and destiny but not your sexual orientation. P.S isn't love my neighbour in the Bible just thought I'll clear that up

Alex; periphery.:

Here's a quick pearl of wisdom from the newly-elected Pope Francis: "Let's not be naive, we're not talking about a simple political battle; [gay marriage] is a destructive pretension against the plan of God. We are not talking about a mere bill, but rather a machination of the Father of Lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God."

Just what we need, another old fart talking out of his ass. I was born Christian, but since have studied/converted to Wicca. I believe god/any higher power loves everyone, thus, why he/it created us. Why would he want to damn a good soul to hell just for loving someone of the same sex?

I believe that God loves everyone. 'nuff said

@ Kinki Jinki
I completely agree with you.

@ Gollum G' Bunny
And people who say that God hates gays or Blacks or Asians or whatever the fuck, need to get their shit together and stop using religion and the name of God as an excuse for their ignorance and assholeness.