Jump to content
Science Forums

Is homosexuality unnatural?


Moontanman

Recommended Posts

I am not sure if animal analogies for human is the best way to define human behavior. For example, some animals will demonstrate incest, killing of their young, some will fight to death, steal, etc., Dogs can hump a human leg which demonstrates sexual behavior out of a species. We can show animals who like a high fat diet. Or animals who prefer rotten meat, such as scavengers. There are animals, like lions that demonstrate polygamy. One can also witness old animals having sex with adolescent animals. We can get whatever we want using some type of animal observation. This may not be the best approach.

 

Here is my logic. The primary purpose of sexuality is reproduction. This evolved to mix genes to help with evolution. The primary purpose of eating, is to feed nutrients and fuel to the body. Both of these ends, have a carrot on the string, to lead humans and animals to these final ends. Natural should be defined as the range of carrots that have selective advantage in terms of reaching the logical ends. If one gets bogged down chasing the carrot, one is off in a subroutine. If we use animal behavior, as the justification, there are all types of subroutines that are possible. Many have been eliminated by culture because they don't reach the ends.

 

Let me give an example. I can eat rocks, if my subroutine or the carrot on a string for eating is consciously or unconsciously placed in that loop. I can then point to birds and chickens to support this subroutine. In that case, science would look at the bigger loop of eating and would say eating rocks, although pleasurable for me, and is also demonstrated by some animals, does not promote the goal of the bigger hunger loop. I would be told I have modified the natural carrot connected to the big loop in such a way I have left the big loop in favor of a subroutine.

 

The way the brain is set up, is with a core. Then there is personality software and then the conscious mind. We can run the brain from any of these points. The carrot on the string is usually done at the level of the software.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure if animal analogies for human is the best way to define human behavior.

I agree, so it's sure a good thing that I wasn't doing that. As I thought was painfully obvious, I was rebutting the ridiculous claim that homosexuality is unnatural, I was not arguing for a specific type of human behavior being accepted for the sole reason that "animals do it too."

 

As for the rest of your post, well, it's completely irrelevant to my position and based on a strawman, so I ignored it.

 

 

EDIT: However, I will comment that many of your premises are cartoonishly misguided. For example, if homosexuality were not able to be selected it would have been removed from the gene pool generations ago... Yet you, despite the hundreds of times you've been corrected on the process of evolution at this site and others, continue to argue based on bad misinterpretations of the actual process. Evolution is about much more than passing on just your own genes. I encourage you to review the grandmother hypothesis, for example.

 

 

 

 

Finally... this just warrants being shown again proudly. :bow:

 

 

 

 

Oh yeah... She IS holding a bow. How 'bout that? I'd never have known had they not typed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

LOL-IN

 

Christian cure for homosexuality

My name is Katrina Fox and I am a homosexual. As is the case with Alcoholics or Narcotics Anonymous, that admission is apparently the first step in my journey to become straight - according to Living Waters, an international ministry that offers courses to help people who suffer from a range of sexual problems or "brokenness", including same-sex attraction.

Lifematters - LifeAndStyle - theage.com.au

 

If I was a girl/woman, I would want to be Gay. Women are so much more interesting than men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah... the loving and accepting embrace of the religious perspective. "Homosexuality is a disease to be cured, a problem to be fixed, a broken desire to be righted."

 

 

I wonder how many of the folks who see this as an abomination can tell us all the exact day they chose to be straight. :phones:

I hope you are not being $arca$tic about one of our great religion$?:)

 

I was interested to read a news item about the fear that the Catholic Church in Canada has that they may go broke/bankrupt because of all the paedophilia legal cases against clergy.

 

If paedophiles only knew the incredible long-term emotion tumult and lasting psychological harm they do --do you think they would stop?

It really cancels out any good they can do as a priest/teacher etc..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know if homosexuality is mentioned in the New Testament?

 

AFAIK, all mentions of sodomy (homosexuality) are in the old testament... specifically Deuteronomy, Kings, and Job, with some in Exodus and Leviticus.

 

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2019:5-8;%20Exodus%2022:19;%20Leviticus%2018:22,23;20:13,15,16;%20Deuteronomy

 

BibleGateway.com - PassageLookup: Deuteronomy 23:17; 1 Kings 14:24;15:12;22:46; 2 Kings 23:7; Job

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if i didn't know better i'd say that we are bonded, if i'd a said yes you would've said no :D

I just found this quiet gem when the page loaded at the begging of the thread.

As is said in Oz "I'll Pay that one"

Sex is certainly a big part of bonding.

 

I wonder how smell influences mate selection, in homosexuals, as it does in heterosexual females? - Choosing a partner most genetically diverse from you.-

There does not seem to be a point to that, if you are homosexual?

 

It would be interesting to see how many paedophiles were Christian or Christian Clergy (the ones convicted and in jail). A good bit of statistical research for someone?

So then we would know if we could say "Christianity causes buggery" or some such similar.

Where does it say in the Bible or New Testament that we should bugger little children? Perhaps some one got the grammar wrong in the translation of Jesus'

words, "Suffer the little children to come unto Me" or perhaps many clergy are dyslectic:evil:

 

Further, on the Christianity cure thing, I posted this also on a social forum and an avowed follower of the, forgiving, inclusive, gentle philosophy of Jesus Christ had this to say:-

Let It Be Known If You Attack Christians (ME As It Also My NAME) That I Will Come Back At You Harder, i'm sick Of Atheist Shoving Their CRAP Down My & My Freinds Throats.

This Christian Is A Warrior.

Imagine A Bikie Jehovahs witness: Someone Who Knocks On Your Door & Tells You To **** Off... T

alternatively

It is people who are extremist with their views that are a major problem!!

I am a Christian yet I am accepting & respectful of all religions. I am a heterosexual yet I am accepting and respectful of other sexual orientations. I for one do not believe that "Christian" and "warrior" belong together because it is immensely contradictory!! AND, I do try my very best not to judge others, especially in a dergoatory amnner!!!

Christian cure for homosexuality - Care2 News Network

 

Religion the problem, or people the problem?

The Naturalness of Homosexuality

 

Homosexuality Is Very Natural

Lets Stop The Lies That Hurt So Many

God Loves All Just As HE Created Them

Why Can't Christians ?

 

The naturalness of homosexuality completely verifies scripture that says absolutely nothing about what we know as homosexuality today.

The Naturalness of Homosexuality

 

What is "natural"?

A value judgement?

An issue of morality, ethics, belief, not of science?

 

to a chemist a chemical he creates in a laboratory that is "nature identical" is therefore 'natural'. Yet we have 'synthetic' nature identical man made, chemicals (e.g. pyrethrins) not working the same as 'natural' ones.

 

We look to animals because we share a lot of DNA with them and they have taught us alot about ourselves without dismembering or stalking human.

I agree HB direct comparisons/transfers of reserch from animals to humans is fraught.

In compiling past and current research, it has been determined that thousands of identified animal species have demonstrated homosexual behavior. "Homosexuality has been observed in more than 1,500 species, and the phenomenon has been well described for 500 of them," according to Petter Bockman, project coordinator of the University of Oslo's Natural History Museum's exhibition display. "Against Nature?" Let's look at some specific examples.

http://www.thethinkingblog.com/2008/10/animals-gone-wild-homosexuality-in.html

 

What we are talking about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to see how many paedophiles were Christian or Christian Clergy (the ones convicted and in jail). A good bit of statistical research for someone?

So then we would know if we could say "Christianity causes buggery" or some such similar.

Where does it say in the Bible or New Testament that we should bugger little children? Perhaps some one got the grammar wrong in the translation of Jesus'

words, "Suffer the little children to come unto Me" or perhaps many clergy are dyslectic

 

I did post about this briefly back in October of 2008.

 

 

http://hypography.com/forums/theology-forum/16311-theistic-and-atheistic-influences-on-society-12.html#post242567

 

This article examines associations between self-reported religious affiliations and official offense histories among 111 incarcerated adult male sexual offenders. Four categories of religiosity were devised according to self-reported continuities and discontinuities in life-course religious affiliations: atheists, dropouts, converts, and stayers. ANCOVAs indicated that stayers (
those who maintained religious involvement from childhood to adulthood) had more sexual offense convictions, more victims, and younger victims, than other groups
. Results challenge assumptions that religious involvement should, as with other crime, serve to deter sexual offending behavior. Results are discussed in terms of social control and situational theories of crime.

 

 

I also appreciated Moonman's comments about the simple numbers involved here, how there are more religious people in general, and hence more crimes by said religious people. Something like 80-90% of the country self-identifies with some sort of religion, so it's not surprising that religious are more involved with sexual crimes against children.

 

However, with that said, many religious teachings attempt to directly suppress our natural sexual urges, and that inhibition tends to lead to more acts committed in order to release those urges. It's like holding a balloon full of air under the water. The harder you press it down, the more forcefully and unexpectedly it pops back to the surface.

 

Further, all one must do is recall the issues with Catholic priests and child molestation to bring into perspective the significant anchoring effect religiosity has on this data.

 

 

And from Essay later that same thread shared a study more relevant to this particular thread:

 

Disgust, scrupulosity and conservative attitudes about sex: Evidence for a mediational model of homophobia

 

Journal of Research in Personality, Volume 42, Issue 5, October 2008, Pages 1364-1369

 

In the present study, core disgust predicted negative attitudes toward homosexuals even after controlling for contamination fear. The effect of core disgust on negative attitudes toward homosexuals was indirect, partially
mediated by conservative sexual attitudes and religiosity
. The effects of religious principles on negative attitudes toward homosexuals were indirect, via conservative sexual beliefs. These results establish a link between disgust and negative attitudes towards homosexuals that is not fully accounted for by contamination concerns, but rather is partially
accounted for by conservative sexual ideology and religiosity.

 

 

 

It's hard not to just do or think anything you want when you believe that you're being told to hate someone because god (and your infallible book) wants you to. There aren't a lot of logical arguments (if there are any at all) which can overcome a delusion as deep and broad as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

originally posted by moontanman

Does anyone know if homosexuality is mentioned in the New Testament?

Off topic

from Bible gateway

1 Corinthians 6:8-10 (New International Version)

8Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.

 

9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

 

BibleGateway.com: Search for a Bible passage in over 35 languages and 50 versions.

originally posted by Michaelangelica

It would be interesting to see how many paedophiles were Christian or Christian Clergy (the ones convicted and in jail). A good bit of statistical research for someone?

So then we would know if we could say "Christianity causes buggery" or some such similar.

Where does it say in the Bible or New Testament that we should bugger little children? Perhaps some one got the grammar wrong in the translation of Jesus'

words, "Suffer the little children to come unto Me" or perhaps many clergy are dyslectic

from dictionary.com

sexual desire in an adult for a child.

this is aberrant behaviour that stems from mental illness not from a religion. It is quite common for individuals suffering from mental ilnesses to gravitate towards religion. Off topic

 

originally posted by infinitenow

It's hard not to just do or think anything you want when you believe that you're being told to hate someone because god (and your infallible book) wants you to. There aren't a lot of logical arguments (if there are any at all) which can overcome a delusion as deep and broad as that.

let's stay on topic here. This thread is about natural/unnatural homosexuality, and not a forum for religion bashing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we need to do, to solve this riddle is define natural and natural human. Natural may not be the same for all critters. For example, what comes natural for a lion will not be the same as what comes natural for a gazelle. There will be some natural overlap, but there will also some natural differences. One can't assume just because gazelles eat grass, this is natural to lions because we have some observations of lions eating grass. In this case, the natural function is different for the same behavior. The gazelle does it for food but the lion might do it to help digestion without ever really digesting it.

 

Once we define natural human, human willpower is able to tweak the natural human set point. For example, the human arms have a natural range of capability. We can add a backhoe as an extension of the human arms, to increase this natural capability. Driving a backhoe is not natural, but it extends the natural capability. On the other hand, placing handcuffs on the wrists will lower the capability of the arms, relative to natural. This is also unnatural but it dips natural below the natural set point.

 

Relative to the gay riddle, we need to first define "natural human" and then figure out if gay is at natural, dips below natural or goes beyond the natural. The debate has been whether gay is natural or unnatural. Science appears to say natural and religion appears to say unnatural. Nobody is arguing that gay extends natural to the right. Everyone is plotting gay somewhere between natural and the left of natural (handcuffs) but not to the right of natural (backhoe). We just need to figure out where that point is.

 

In a qualitative way, one can rough it in even before we define natural human. One natural purpose of sex is procreation. This can be deduced from the observation that sexual organs generate gamete cells, which science has shown is connected to procreation. Science has also shown that only certain combinations of sexual behavior will lead to procreation. That part of sex appears to be one aspect of natural, since all higher critters reproduce the same way.

 

Another aspect for sex is social bonding. Sex is very pleasurable, even if the goal is not procreation. One thing that comes to mind, for this bonding affect, is analogous to a bonding addiction loop for repeatable behavior. For example, if touching a particular person's hand gave a "crack' buzz, one could get addicted to that touch and form a bond, because of the association loop between the touch, the person, the buzz, the addiction, etc. This type of strong "buzz" affect could help bond individuals even if they is not compatible. This "buzz" loop could also assist procreation with a particular source of "buzz" helping to maintain bonding continuity in a situation where continuity would not be possible without the "buzz" loop.

 

In the case of multiple bonding sources, using the strong "buzz" affect, if it leads to group cohesion, this might be natural. But if it led to group dissociation, the social bonding affect does not apply, exactly. For example, if it stimulated jealousy, causing the group to break apart, the "buzz" is not for group bonding. This is more a self addiction loop. The lion may mate will all the lionesses, but that strengthens the group. A self addiction loop "buzz" may create the illusion in the mind this is bonding one to the group, but if reality data is doing the opposite, it is an ego-centric illusion. This is not natural unless the group is growing closer because of it.

 

One source of weak bonding "buzz" could be scent. A group scent or scent of one's child or mate can form a scent-loop for bonding. This might be common among families or clans of animals. The strong "buzz" may not be needed, unless there is a requirement of pairing or if the scent is getting nebulous.

 

Although humans use these natural affects, humans can also bond without scent and without the requirement of a "strong buzz". For example, people can talk and bond though audio type cues, which are not chemical. People with similar beliefs can bond even if scent or "buzz" is not there. This is more characteristic of humans and may be part of natural human or human that is to the right side of natural, since it first required the invention of language.. Language is sort of one backhoe affect that can extend human bonding even when scent and strong "buzz" are not available.

 

Relative to religion, it is only the "buzz" loop that is questioned. Beyond that one really can't tell the difference with straight since the affect are similar. The buzz loop does not integrate with the procreation loop. But even straight people "buzz" bond 95% of the time without this goal in mind. We need to define natural human.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

let's stay on topic here. This thread is about natural/unnatural homosexuality, and not a forum for religion bashing

 

I suggest you are over sensitive. It was a statement of fact, no bashing. When someone believes they are acting on the will of god, reason and logic are no longer viable weapons to correct them on their misguided path.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we need to do, to solve this riddle is define natural and natural human. (very long passage) We need to define natural human.

 

There was a lot of text in your post which sounded very off-topic to me. Are you comparing the tendency of people to be interested in each other with the tendency of people to fall in love with others of the same sex? Or what was the point of the whole "buzz" thing? :)

 

As for defining "natural human", it sounds very fundamentalist to me. I am sure you can find a lot of people who will support the very idea that there is such a thing as a "natural human", but I bet you'll get 6 billion answers as to what that is.

 

I think you might be better off defining "natural" and "human" in isolation, but it still won't get you anywhere, IMHO. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...